dying pony on dartmoor

[alfiesmum]

such a sadness, hope foal gets nice home

 

[tasel]

So sad. I do get the point that they are wild though, and don't blame the owner (who again must be different from the regular horse owner). Unless you have military tracking devices, it would be impossible to look after each horse on the moor.

 

[Queenbee]

Happy hacker and dry rot... I am fully aware of the remote nature and terrain of dartmoor... Having lived in Devon up unil the age of 21. I don't give a toss if it's difficult or awkward to find a horse, use binoculars, check the herds, she should not have had to be told by a member of the public that her mare was ill, she had obviously been struggling for a long time, there is simply no excuse for not keeping proper check on your own animals, no one suggested its simple and easy, but not impossible and If charlotte can't be bothered to check her own horses and has to wait for someone else to inform her get animal is ill before she tries to locate it she shouldn't be doing the job. Horses should be checked when they are well not just because they are bloody dying. Furthermore There are actually no 'wild horses' in the uk... They are semi feral, and as such are owned and the owner has a duty of care to these animals and is reaponsible for their health and welfare this includes regular checks...

 

[ester]

I suppose that is sort of where I am coming from really.. I understand the complexities and complications of getting a horse in (and that running one in would not have been appropriate in this case), although equally given that this mare is possibly elderly and has been coming down for winter enough times to know where 'home' is maybe she wouldn't have been that hard to catching her then current state with a bucket of grub . or attempts to give her some supplementary feeding on the moor?

I do understand that DM reporting is a bit dodgy but just wonder whether sufficient effort/precautions were made for the best welfare interests of the mare in this instance.I do hope the owner knew about her condition but had not been able to intervene or catch her up rather than complete non-knowledge. I'm not sure what the regs are for hill sheep but given that most sheep legally have to be checked daily I believe I am not sure how not knowing your pony isn't doing too well can be acceptable in this day and age, especially in summer when moor access is not particularly compromised.

 

[Queenbee]

f this thread I posted yesterday about the legalities and welfare and issues surrounding responsibility of the horse owner, and the differences between owning domesticated and feral/semi feral ponies in England.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13334-cop-horse-091204.pdf

I had no idea what the legal requirements were regarding the care of Dartmoor ponies or how it differs what level of care I am required by law to provide for ben… The answer is it doesn’t. I am surprised as I certainly wouldn’t expect the owners of feral ponies to be required to check their horses everyday, but apparently they are supposed to adhear to exactly the same laws as the owners of domesticated horses. I provide a link to the
Code of Practice for the Welfare of Horses, Ponies, Donkeys and their Hybrids…The Animal Welfare Act 2006

Please note, this Act covers all Equines…

“Domestic horses and ponies (including feral
and semi feral ponies); donkeys; and hybrids
(including mules).”

And deals with:

Supervision
1.25 Horses at grass should be inspected at least once a day, preferably more often. Stabled or group-housed horses should be inspected at least twice a day. Particular attention should be paid to their gait, demeanour, feet, body condition and appetite so that early signs of disease, injury, illness or signs of parasites can be noticed and appropriate treatment promptly provided. Close examinations should also be conducted at regular intervals, ideally daily, in order to identify any problems (e.g. skin conditions) that may not be apparent from a distance.

There is also an entire section on Health and Welfare (see section five).

Whilst I personally agree that checking Dartmoor ponies on a daily basis is an excessive expectation, and I understand that they are semi feral and as a result need to be allowed that bit more ‘independence’ from humans, however this does not mean that as a result their health and welfare should be compromised. Absolutely no one can tell me this horse shouldn’t have been checked by its owner and its weak malnourished state identified by her. She was neglectful of her Legal responsibility as an owner… and deserves no praise for her horse ownership skills and no sympathy for the loss of one of her horses. This mare would have been losing condition for weeks.

As a side note, this welfare act is a fantastic guide to all horse owners and comes with conditioning score sheet. It is a 30 page document and sets out in full, what our duty is as the owner/ carer of a horse. Well worth reading.

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

I agree with "QueenBee" above: basically if it was anyone's horse/pony on here, then there'd be good cause for a cruelty/neglect prosecution.

But if we're talking about it being in the hands of the good old RSPCA ......... then again probably not

Poor little mare; what an amazing thing to do to lead her foal back to habitation.

 

[happyhacking:)]

QB you may have lived on Dartmoor but have you ever tried to catch one directly off the moors? Going round checking on these ponies daily would be a full time job in itself they don't always stick together do are often spread miles and miles apart. How would you go about it when you had 40 or more ponies out there miles apart? And if one was injured or sick how would you go about catching it without causing a horrendous amount of stress to the poor animal? And then what would you do with it if you did? These are not domestic horses they are low value livestock hard and cruel as it may be. They live hard lives and natural selection does play its part. These animals must remain in their wild state in order to effectively graze the moorland. They are checked regularly but believe me the chances of finding one single horse up on the moors is extreemly remote they are all very similar in appearance and could be anywhere in tens of square miles hiding in gullies literally anywhere. It's not nice and nobody takes any pleasure in seeing horses in this state but this is the way it is.

 

[Wishful]

If one particular pony wants to hide from you, you have no chance- they roam, they hide in gullies, behind rocks, Dartmoor is full of pony sized hiding places - even for the drift some avoid it, and that involves loads of people. Not convinced you could count them every day either - they can easily avoid you. Given that when prisoners escaped from Dartmoor prison it was very hard for an organised search to find them (and they don't have the moorland instincts of an animal) what chances do 1 holder of common rights and a few mates have.

We once came across a sick foal on dartmoor. Herded it back to mum and had to hope for the best. We were about 2 hours walk from a road/track, no trailer would have got near the place (not on one of the army ranges) and quite how one is supposed to move a sick pony to somewhere it "could" be loaded without stressing it to death I wouldn't know.

Horses are also programmed to hide when giving birth/ill so that they don't attract predators, and will tend to be quite stoic, particularly the minis/hill ponies which are much tougher than the larger domesticated breeds - the ponies are more akin to sheep in a lot of ways (just with a lot more personality and curiousity!)

 

[ester]

I agree daily would likely be problematic.. weekly.. less so? on horseback? on quad? with a sackful of nuts?.. never known sheep not learn that quad= food for a start.. how regularly would you say they are checked by most of the owners? and just that they aren't really roaming over the sort of sized areas that the mustangs do for example.

Thats what I'm getting at really.. was sufficient effort being made to ensure these animals welfare, it may well have been we just don't know either way. No maybe you couldn't catch the single one up and having a foal certainly makes it more complicated, I am wondering whether any are ever shot if they are deemed to be suffering? injured? badly lame? - if catching one up is so impossible, if you do find it surely it is better to shorten its misery?.. this is hypothetical though not suggesting it was the best course of action for this mare

I do feel I should reiterate that I feel that natural selection should play no part in the fate of these animals, they are not natural they were bred by us and their breeding is still controlled by us.. the mares and stallions put on the hill each year are selected by us (hopefully from previous years' stock that did well). If we choose to put those that are unable to cope on the moor than we should, ultimately, be responsible for them.

The whole ecology argument goes on from that really.. should we allow suffering in order to ensure that the moor looks like we want it? or so that the species/biodiversity we think should survive does. If we are interested in talking natural selection and evolution then we should leave it all be and most of it would eventually graduate to forest. It is only like it is because we have managed it for so long. (although this is a slight tangent argument that I am occasionally guilty of )

 

[PennyJ]

All I can say is that often these feral/semi-feral ponies will see you/hear you (the owner) coming and hide. I have a mare that does this to me, everyone else sees her, I go or my husband goes and 9 times out of 10 we will look for hours and not find her. She sees us and hides, I am quite convinced of it, then watches us tramp about searching in vain for a few hours. Yet I can always find her mother (who does not belong to us). My Queenie lets me find her when she wants to be found, otherwise NO. They were branding some ponies at one of the drifts this week who were 4 years old, unbranded and had managed to evade capture up until that point. It is not that unusual.

It really isn't as straightforward as some posters make it sound... Once found, you have to catch them, assuming they are halterbroken (not sure my yearlings would remember much about leading in a halter since I turned them back out 3 months ago), and lead them to somewhere suitable (probably a pound) for loading them into a trailer/lorry to travel home. Or else its a long walk home, in my case 25 miles. The ponies get used to living on their wits, they learn not to be so trusting as domesticated horses.

 

[hairycob]

Also very sick ponies can lose condition extremely quickly indeed. We had a horse that literally lost weight as you watched - to the point where a Vet that had seen him 18 hours earler said "*****" about it when he saw him. The day he was put down the farrier who had shod him 8 days earlier, before fell ill, didn't recognise him. If that can happen in 5 days to a horse that has had constant care, what is going to happen with a pony living wild on the moor.

 

[Queenbee]

I'm going to keep this short and sweet. I didn't say that in my opinion they should be checked daily... I stated that this is the law although I agreed that this was perhaps overkill. I do not however agree with a lot of the sentiments on here... It is how it is, it's harsh but deal with it, it's not easy etc. no its not easy, no one said it was, but it needs to be done and it is an obligation that any horse owner takes on. These horses should be checked, I do think it's impractical to check them daily but weekly perhaps. Tough if it takes a lot of hard work and effort. Furthermore, if there are problems with this approach then find solutions to the problems. It's a cop out to say its too hard so we don't bother. Why should the welfare of these animals be counted as any less important than that of my horse? Legally it isn't, so are you saying its ok to ignore the welfare act put in place for all horses when you own and breed on dartmoor but it's not ok when you have a horse for pleasure? I recognise that this is a difficult situation but I do not agree that they should be left alone to get on with it. I guess some of us will have to agree to disagree on this. I personally think that if something presents as a logistical nightmare, you don't sweep it under the carpet, you try and find solutions to the problem. Furthermore I take great offence at being told how quickly a horse can lose condition, having struggled to fight to save the life of my own horse this year and lost the battle, I find it offensive to be treated as ignorant in such matters. I know that this was probably not the intention of that post but it's how it came across.

 

[AmyMay]

Hear, hear Queenbee!!

 

[Goldenstar]

I'm going to keep this short and sweet. I didn't say that in my opinion they should be checked daily... I stated that this is the law although I agreed that this was perhaps overkill. I do not however agree with a lot of the sentiments on here... It is how it is, it's harsh but deal with it, it's not easy etc. no its not easy, no one said it was, but it needs to be done and it is an obligation that any horse owner takes on. These horses should be checked, I do think it's impractical to check them daily but weekly perhaps. Tough if it takes a lot of hard work and effort. Furthermore, if there are problems with this approach then find solutions to the problems. It's a cop out to say its too hard so we don't bother. Why should the welfare of these animals be counted as any less important than that of my horse? Legally it isn't, so are you saying its ok to ignore the welfare act put in place for all horses when you own and breed on dartmoor but it's not ok when you have a horse for pleasure? I recognise that this is a difficult situation but I do not agree that they should be left alone to get on with it. I guess some of us will have to agree to disagree on this. I personally think that if something presents as a logistical nightmare, you don't sweep it under the carpet, you try and find solutions to the problem. Furthermore I take great offence at being told how quickly a horse can lose condition, having struggled to fight to save the life of my own horse this year and lost the battle, I find it offensive to be treated as ignorant in such matters. I know that this was probably not the intention of that post but it's how it came across.

What makes you think it's the law that they have to be checked everyday ?

 

[Queenbee]

The welfare act makes me think that... Look at my earlier post in this thread it provides a link to the act, I have even quoted specific parts of the act in my post to outline this

 

[Queenbee]

I also accept that the wording in the act is 'should' be and therefore leaves some room for manoeuvre on these issues but, if a minimum of once a day is advised not checking semi feral ponies on a weekly basis is in my opinion neglectful

 

[Goldenstar]

I also accept that the wording in the act is 'should' be and therefore leaves some room for manoeuvre on these issues but, if a minimum of once a day is advised not checking semi feral ponies on a weekly basis is in my opinion neglectful

Exactly , it will take years of case law before this act beds down.

 

[jhoward]

tbf if you tried to impliment much of that act on owners of the dhp, well there would be no ponies on the moors.

1st thing... they dont have passports, well theres one law broken.

2nd they are not bred ..or even thought of in such ways a domesticated horse is, if this was the case then huge numbers wouldnt end up in incinerators, or zoos.

now, lets suppose owners do cover the moors to find their stock, when they find a poorly one what do you propose they do to rectify it??

most ponies are wild, hardly going to be able to pop A headcollar on it, and administer drugs.. how are they ment to get said pony off the more??

whilst i appreciate that there may be suffering happening, i think people need to be pratical, relistic, and less sentimental.

 

[suestowford]

If charlotte can't be bothered to check her own horses and has to wait for someone else to inform her get animal is ill before she tries to locate it she shouldn't be doing the job.

Why pick on Charlotte Faulkner? She was not the owner of the mare, she is the one who has since taken on the raising of the foal.

 

[Queenbee]

Exactly , it will take years of case law before this act beds down.

Well then, they should make a start with some cases then shouldn't they... whilst not ideal for the owners of moorland ponies, its a start, and they should be held accountable just as any owner should... perhaps this identifies that ammendments are needed to to the act to take into account the environmental conditions, but the need to check on ones animals is unquestionable in my opinion. How often would you or anyone else on here think is an acceptable length of time to leave a horse unchecked?

Another question, was the suffering of this mare unnecasarry in your or anyone elses opinion?

I know what my heart and my head say to both of those questions.

 

[Queenbee]

tbf if you tried to impliment much of that act on owners of the dhp, well there would be no ponies on the moors.

1st thing... they dont have passports, well theres one law broken.
No argument from me on that
2nd they are not bred ..or even thought of in such ways a domesticated horse is, if this was the case then huge numbers wouldnt end up in incinerators, or zoos.
that does not mean that the intent of the owner is not to breed, quite the contrary, they allow them to breed and then sell on the stock, for pennies yes, but all the same they allow them to breed for profit. They don't end up in incinerators because they end up purchased by kill buyers at the auctions
now, lets suppose owners do cover the moors to find their stock, when they find a poorly one what do you propose they do to rectify it??
dart it, and treat/pts depending on the issue... its not that difficult. so what if it costs more than the animal is worth on the market? Far rather PTS than allow suffering, they do after all OWN the animals, if they don't want to, then round them all up and sell them at the next sale to save the hassle of being responsible owners.
most ponies are wild, hardly going to be able to pop A headcollar on it, and administer drugs.. how are they ment to get said pony off the more??
As I said, dart it, if transport can reach the pony, thats fine, if not treat on site, at least make some effort to be humane
whilst i appreciate that there may be suffering happening, i think people need to be pratical, relistic, and less sentimental.

Why, because they are any less deserving of humane treatment and welfare than any other horse? What a cop out JH.

 

[Goldenstar]

Well then, they should make a start with some cases then shouldn't they... whilst not ideal for the owners of moorland ponies, its a start, and they should be held accountable just as any owner should... perhaps this identifies that ammendments are needed to to the act to take into account the environmental conditions, but the need to check on ones animals is unquestionable in my opinion. How often would you or anyone else on here think is an acceptable length of time to leave a horse unchecked?

Another question, was the suffering of this mare unnecasarry in your or anyone elses opinion?

I know what my heart and my head say to both of those questions.

Frankly your head and heart is nothing to do with it the intention of the new act was not to micromanage how people look after horses it was to seek to make unlawful providing grossly inadequate care before the animals life was a risk or it had died .
It seeks to prevent the cases where everyone knows grossly inadequate care is being given the way the previous act was interpreted meanlt that unless the animals suffering as enormous it was very difficult to act.
A feral or semi feral horse is no different to a hill sheep and it is not unlawful not to see them everyday.

 

[Queenbee]

Frankly your head and heart is nothing to do with it the intention of the new act was not to micromanage how people look after horses it was to seek to make unlawful providing grossly inadequate care before the animals life was a risk or it had died .
It seeks to prevent the cases where everyone knows grossly inadequate care is being given the way the previous act was interpreted meanlt that unless the animals suffering as enormous it was very difficult to act.
A feral or semi feral horse is no different to a hill sheep and it is not unlawful not to see them everyday.

I think to an extent you have just proved the majority of my point here Not checking on your livestock regularly, is grossly inadequate care. You must have missed the numerous times that I myself have stated that i do not think daily checking is possible, logistical, or should be expected. Weekly however I do. and actually my head is relevant, my heart not so much. My head says that checking should be done weekly, that it is right and proper to do so, not from a bunny hugger point of view, but from a responsible welfare point of view. My heart would like them to be checked and cared for as mine are (in terms of health and welfare provisions) but my head knows that this is the bunny hugger in me trying to get out... I keep caging the bugger up but she still tries to make an appearance. No, I think weekly checks on horses, is right, proper and responsible and a reasonable expectation.

 

[Wishful]

Darting them is very silly idea. The dart anaesthetic (large animal immobilon) is dangerous for both the animal and all around them. You'd need to clear the moor of humans (it's more or less instantly lethal in humans - the vet drawing the thing up and loading the dart gun first draws up the antidote and hands it to a trusted assistant before going near the immobilon.) Better for a human to be shot by a rifle bullet than a dart from a dart gun! As for the animal, there's a strong risk of them legging it for the nearest body of water - on Dartmoor cue Pony in bog!

Better to stab it with some kind of i/m drug (if it's going to need just one treatment) as you can usually sneak up on one (when you know where it is in the first place). But you won't get near it again so debatable what treatment will happen. Realistically given their value the most likely treatment is going to be intracranial lead, unless transport is possible, ongoing vet treatment is unlikely to be cost effective or much fun for the unbroken horse.

 

[Queenbee]

Darting them is very silly idea. The dart anaesthetic (large animal immobilon) is dangerous for both the animal and all around them. You'd need to clear the moor of humans (it's more or less instantly lethal in humans - the vet drawing the thing up and loading the dart gun first draws up the antidote and hands it to a trusted assistant before going near the immobilon.) Better for a human to be shot by a rifle bullet than a dart from a dart gun! As for the animal, there's a strong risk of them legging it for the nearest body of water - on Dartmoor cue Pony in bog!

Better to stab it with some kind of i/m drug (if it's going to need just one treatment) as you can usually sneak up on one (when you know where it is in the first place). But you won't get near it again so debatable what treatment will happen. Realistically given their value the most likely treatment is going to be intracranial lead, unless transport is possible, ongoing vet treatment is unlikely to be cost effective or much fun for the unbroken horse.

Fair enough, although I still say that lead is far preferable that letting nature take its course.

 

[ester]

I did mention shooting earlier... but I don't think anyone commented on what was actually done when a pony is sufficiently ill/injured so that its welfare is significantly compromised. I completely agree that darting is not a good idea.. however shooting as and when necessary if welfare I would consider perfectly acceptable. However this does require those ponies sufficiently ill/in pain etc to be identified and their condition possibly monitored beforehand.

I think we have done a much better job breeding sheep to cope on the hill than has been done with the dartmoor hill pony. I think it would be interesting to perhaps introduce some better selection in the ponies allowed up there to best maximise their welfare.

For example.. this from the dartmoor hill pony association site concerns me a bit..

Stock is chosen specifically with hardiness and ability to thrive on Dartmoor, although as there is a strong requirement under current market forces to produce coloured and spotty ponies, our foundation stock now includes coloured and spotty stallions and even cobs and arabs. This evolution merely carries on with the ancient traditions of breeding for purpose and adapting to market changes.

perhaps they should either be ponies suitable to live out and maintain the ecology of the hill OR they should be bred for the sale ring in nice colours not try and do both

 

[guesstimation]

Why pick on Charlotte Faulkner? She was not the owner of the mare, she is the one who has since taken on the raising of the foal.

I'm glad this was picked up on! I know charlotte and if there is one person who works tirelessly for the ponies and their welfare its her, even her own welfare has suffered for theirs! . She's an amazing woman trying to make things better and that's no easy task with most of the stuck in their ways farmers!

 

[guesstimation]

Stock is chosen specifically with hardiness and ability to thrive on Dartmoor, although as there is a strong requirement under current market forces to produce coloured and spotty ponies, our foundation stock now includes coloured and spotty stallions and even cobs and arabs. This evolution merely carries on with the ancient traditions of breeding for purpose and adapting to market changes.

perhaps they should either be ponies suitable to live out and maintain the ecology of the hill OR they should be bred for the sale ring in nice colours not try and do both

In an ideal world yes but just breeding for suitability to live out and maintain the ecology does not get any money it only costs so of course they are going to breed whatever will hopefully cover their costs. And there are some quality ponies coming off the moors with some farmers cutting right back and breeding not as many and more selectively. Unfortunately not all follow suite and what annoyed me the most when I worked with all this was the breeders who were breeding rubbish then putting them through the sales then shooting them as they hadn't sold but saying they'd rather keep breeding the way they were than not have foals, or breed and shoot than let them go to do gooders, and I'll keep breeding I always have done as have the past ten generations of my family......

It's not just the end product getting shot its the poor mare going through it over and over again, in foal year after year having it torn away each time.

There are so many more responsible breeders breeding good stock but unfortunately it's the poor ones that get noticed and they need to change their ways. Maybe one day, it is certainly improving just very slowly

 

[Dry Rot]

If Dartmoor ponies should be checked once weekly, how often would you suggest the red deer on Exmoor should be checked?

And how far do you extend this duty of care? Surely, all animals have feelings and should therefore be treated with equal compassion? Or is it only the one's that appeal to our baser instincts that deserve our special care?

Should I be carrying out a weekly health check on the rabbits that eat my crops and demolish the banks of my ditches?

Yes, I know this is all nonsense but in the current context the logic is perfectly reasonable. Dartmoor ponies are what they are because the sick, weak, and old die (or are removed) because they can't cope with the harsh conditions. Those that survive are the tougher ones and I don't really think it makes a lot of difference whether they are coloured or not.

It is a very cruel method of selection, but that is Nature and Nature is ruthless. Frankly, I'd rather see that than a breed deteriorate and be destroyed by "The Fancy" -- and I'm sure that needs no explanation.

 

[tallyho!]

I can't see what all this fuss is about..... ???