Help Humphrey

HelpHumphrey said:
The ride was suppsose to be a nice day out they had heard it was a quiet common ride mainly walking and the odd canter, this turned out not to be the case, it is hard not to allow a horse to go with the herd so they did have to keep up with the canters when it was done on hardcore paths, does this mean owner deserved to have their horse taken!
Click to expand...

That is untrue. The owner has been involved in many common rides before and knew exactly what this one involved, having ridden it before. It is more sedate than some but still includes a lot of hill cantering and galloping up extremely steep long slopes. The owner knew that but still told the girl on the bay mare it'd be fine, and allowed his poor-condition horse to go The chestnut got itself into a complete state the second we set off and should have been retired early. And if I remember correctly, Humphrey has been on rides before and behaved the same so it was known how he'd act.

However I'd agree that removing the horse based solely on that is over-zealous but I believe there is more going on.
 
HelpHumphrey said:
Owner does not own any other horse that was on that ride. Him and his partner have three other horses who never even got looked at by the inspector! These horses are in prime condition! The inspector was only interested in the TB. The bay and cob are owned by different people. The ride was suppsose to be a nice day out they had heard it was a quiet common ride mainly walking and the odd canter, this turned out not to be the case, it is hard not to allow a horse to go with the herd so they did have to keep up with the canters when it was done on hardcore paths, does this mean owner deserved to have their horse taken! The people that know them don't think so, they are not malicious people out to see their animals suffer! We understand not all the evidence is available to the public so yes we expect negativity...
Click to expand...

Have to disagree again HH. You said "The ride was suppsose to be a nice day out they had heard it was a quiet common ride mainly walking and the odd canter" Anyone who knows the ride knows it is classed as a "novice" Rideout, and there is a lot of walk/trot on roads but there are several good fast canters/gallops up and over the hills. Some riders took the shortcut which misses out the hill ride, and takes in nice level tracks which leads to the lunch stop, so rider didnt have to follow the herd up the hills, she could have followed some of the others who took the shortcut.

Having said this and looking at all my other posts, I am not getting at you personally, it is in the end the responsibility of the owner to have Humphrey's best interests at heart and not to have his horse doing something it is clearly not fit enough to do.
 
Last edited:
I thought the same Patterdale, I don't think a facebook gang is very often truely helpful to someone's cause!
 
HelpHumphrey said:
No comments have been deleted by the admin of HH page if comments have been deleted its been by the person who put it. We are not interested in debating with people who aren't interested in the help humphrey campaign! Just don't read it if you don't like it. 1000 odd other people disagree with you!
Click to expand...

Ok I had degree of sympathy with the owner of this horse if seemed heavy handed to me however this attitude has made this sympathy completely evaporate .
 
My tb mare came out of winter looking similar to Humphrey but after a couple of weeks out and a change of diet she is looking much much better my friends tb also was looking on the lean side before the spring grass but she has muscle from working over winter unlike mine who has been off. I most definitely would not take dizzy on that long a pleasure ride the way she was looking a few weeks ago and I probably wouldn't even take her now not until she has some muscle and her fitness is up. My friend has taken hers on one and she struggled a bit but they had a good time. Again it's down to riders discretion but the young girl who loans Humphrey probably doesn't have the knowledge to know any better but everyone is different and treats their horses differently. I don't think there was really grounds for him to be seized unless there is something else going on with either the charity or the owners which in my opinion means there is more to this story than what is being told.
Also if dizzy was ever taken from me and believed it done unfairly I would of had a solicitor on it by now regardless of cost.

I hope whatever happens to Humphrey he is happy and well cared for.
 
Another thing I've noticed here: HH says in several posts that Humphrey was reported by somebody who had some kind of supposed issue with his owner... so what about the other horses? How did they get involved? They are supposedly owned by different people, so how did the SSPCA come to be seizing them too?
I don't know, theres just so much here which doesn't seem to be adding up...

The more that HH says and the more I read, the more it seems that the SSPCA may have done the right thing here.

Sorry if this doesn't make sense, my brain seems to be shutting down for the night :rolleyes:
 
HelpHumphrey said:
I meant the other horses in the owners care, why would he neglect one and not the other 3 in his care!
Click to expand...

Why do hundreds of people neglect one and not the others in their care?

If you can find the answer to this one, please can I be the first to know, because I see this scenario almost daily.

This whole thread makes me chuckle (not for the sake of Humphrey, but because it is soooooooooo common for this type of reaction from aggrieved owners when their animals are removed). Half a story given to public, the sob story pictures and video footage....the 'love' they have for that animal (which they have neglected).

Yawn.....
 
Humphrey looking in pretty good nick here, looks like it was taken in spring/summer so assuming last year?

www.facebook.com

https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tn...943179.-2207520000.1369783676.&type=3&theater

And then this, taken on the day he was siezed... quite a noticable difference there!

www.facebook.com

https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tn...943179.-2207520000.1369783676.&type=3&theater

These photos were taken from the HH facebook page.

Also he has a bandaged back leg in most of the photos, including on the siezure day ride. Seems to be an ongoing issue, suggests to me that he shouldn't be in heavy work like galloping up steep hills for 5 hours...
 
Last edited:
I have been reading this with interest. many years ago i worked for a well known horse welfare charity. we did not go in on a whim to remove horses. we tried other methods before removal unless the situation was so bad. It benefited no one to remove healthy animals. often we would have multiple animals come in. some would be better condition than others but all removed. im sorry thete is more to this than whats being said.
 
This comment has been published from the Scottish Animal Welfare:


We, like many, do not support nor condone the actions of The Scottish SPCA in relation to Humphrey.

Members of the public must understand that when the an employee of The Scottish SPCA knocks on your door, you are not obliged to allow them access to your property unless, they witness beforehand, an animal in suffering or they have in their possession a warrant issued by a Scottish Court.

If you find yourself at the hands of a member of staff from the aforementioned organisation, remember, you have the right to no comment, you have the right to have your solicitor present during interview and more importantly, you must be offered the right to have your own veterinary surgeon attend!

Should anyone wish any further information and or assistance, we would urge them to contact Scottish Animal Welfare.

We are a registered not for profit organisation that covers the whole of Scotland. We are dedicated to the rehabilitation and rehoming of injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We have an Equine & Livestock support unit that exists exclusively to assist horse owners and farmers should they require.

Scottish Animal Welfare
scottishanimalwelfare.org.uk
03000 999 000
 
@HelpHumphrey, am i being darn stupid or do you keep talking like your not the owner of Humphrey, 'The owner wasn't aware' - If you own him surely it should be 'I wasn't aware' ??
 
The pertinent point in the above post is "you are not obliged to allow them access to your property unless, they witness beforehand, an animal in suffering"

They could argue that the animal in question, being undeniably thin, and having soundness issues questioned, could be caused suffering by being ridden hard for so many hours, and there may well be other issues that nobody outside the direct involvement of the case is aware of.

I am afraid for me it is a case that is best sorted in the courts. None of us have enough information to say whether the horse warranted seizure and if the bay mare was is such a state and has the same owner then seizure sounds like a positive step until all the facts are established.
 
touchstone said:
The pertinent point in the above post is "you are not obliged to allow them access to your property unless, they witness beforehand, an animal in suffering"

They could argue that the animal in question, being undeniably thin, and having soundness issues questioned, could be caused suffering by being ridden hard for so many hours, and there may well be other issues that nobody outside the direct involvement of the case is aware of.
.
Click to expand...

That was the part I noted too. Because they witnessed the horse at the fun ride therefore they did have the right to enter the premises without a warrant....
 
Not sure who they are. Guessing they're either the young loaner or a friend of hers. Poss the partner of the owner as they don't read like a child.
 
Ive just been reading threw this. I for one am glad that Humphrey has been removed. I no an old owner of his that previously rescued him from an awful state and from what i have heard/no about his current owners its not something he should have to go through again.
 
Jenni_ said:
I know that you are all saying 'Oh hard winters shouldn't be an excuse' but unless you've been up hear battling it like we have, with a lot of our winter spent thigh deep in snow, you can't really comment. I've got a friend who couldn't win. TB who normally winters out just took it very bad this year. Wouldn't eat the haylege in the field. She tried keeping him in but he just stressed. No matter what she did, what food she pumped into him, the weight just wouldn't stay on. He just struggled this year, having never struggled before. Wasn't ghastly, but you would definitely want more meat on him.
Click to expand...


I totally agree. I'm afraid unless you lived though the last winter in Scotland you have no idea what our stock have been through. Not just horses but everything is lean, despite being fed heavily. Last summer was horrendous too and the hay up here is poor. Large agri merchants even ran short on feed at times - there was no sugar beet pulp available to buy in the three biggest shops near me for many weeks! The feed has been pumped in, but there's not much to show for it. There is still a lack of grass here too. If there is stock on it, its not keeping up with them. My Shetland is the only one who has easily maintained condition, but then Shetlands are bred to survive constant wind and rain! He has also been rugged heavily all winter.

Yes the horse looks a bit poor. But he can't have been that poor if he cantered sideways as described by Kalibear for 5 hours...!
 
Just been reading the article on the Scotsman website again and it strikes me that the owner has done a great job of placing the focus directly on the young girl loaning him rather than himself.

"Humphrey’s owner, Joe Ward, 36, said: “Allana has cared for Humphrey for years and has never been anything other than loving. There were dozens of people with her that day and no-one has told me they saw anything untoward.”

When I first read the article I didn't think anything of it as I assumed Allana had Humphrey on full loan and that the owner probably wasn't that involved in the day to day care of Humphrey, but now we know (I think!) that the owner is also the YO and that Allana was leasing/just exercising Humphrey based on the owners advice I have to wonder if this was an attempt to draw attention away from the owner and his treatment of Humphrey?
 
I read it as him refuting the "abusing a horse" thing. We have to remember this is a young girl whose life could be affected by this. I had a loan horse taken back when I was 15 unexpectedly (I'd done the work and the owner wanted the benefits!) and I still remember the pain. To have one taken by the SSPCA like this would be pretty horrible for an adult never mind a child.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top