Horse scrappage scheme idea.

pennyturner said:
A response to the 'who has horses they can't ride' thread...

Would it ease the current horse welfare crisis for the rescue charities to offer an incentive to experienced homes willing to PTS their elderly/sick/lame horse, and take a rescue horse in their place?
Click to expand...

I absolutely would not have any of mine PTS before their time, because they could no longer be ridden (but were field sound and happy), to replace them with some random horse I have no connection with for an 'incentive'.

I actually find Cortez's suggestion less distasteful as long as 'pet' is counted as a purpose.
 
pennyturner said:
A response to the 'who has horses they can't ride' thread...

Would it ease the current horse welfare crisis for the rescue charities to offer an incentive to experienced homes willing to PTS their elderly/sick/lame horse, and take a rescue horse in their place?
Click to expand...

Perhaps I am missing something here, so you basically PTS your best friend who can no longer be ridden to take on a rescue that most likely can't be ridden? Horses are not cars to be thrown on the scrap heap when they develop problems, all of my horses are with me for life as I realise that when a horse comes into our family then it is a lifelong partnership and commitment regardless of whether they become a field ornament through injury/illness/old age. The issue is breeding in the first place which has flooded the market, breeding needs to be somehow regulated.

Well done for trying to think of an idea to ease the crisis but I doubt you will get any supporting votes as this just isn't going to work and we are not all being softies, we are being responsible owners who are prepared to give a home for life to the horses that have given their lives to us.
 
I have several old and unrideables. We've got a long history together and why should their retirement be cut short to make me take on a horse that someone else couldn't be bothered to make enough sacrifice to keep? None of mine NEED to be pts, they are all enjoying their lives and I'm damned if I'm going to make it any easier for the "I can't afford to keep two so I'm sending this less than perfect one to a charity" brigade. If they don't want their horses then they should take responsibility for pts, not expect someone who has horses they are happy keeping to have those horses pts to take on the dumped ones.
 
Absolutely not!!!
If I wanted a rescue horse I would go and get one. If I wanted to PTS my croc I have the means to do so.
I choose to keep my croc alive because I love him dearly, he has a good quality of life and I can afford to do so!
 
jemima*askin said:
I have several old and unrideables. We've got a long history together and why should their retirement be cut short to make me take on a horse that someone else couldn't be bothered to make enough sacrifice to keep? None of mine NEED to be pts, they are all enjoying their lives and I'm damned if I'm going to make it any easier for the "I can't afford to keep two so I'm sending this less than perfect one to a charity" brigade. If they don't want their horses then they should take responsibility for pts, not expect someone who has horses they are happy keeping to have those horses pts to take on the dumped ones.
Click to expand...



YUP!
 
Princess Rosie said:
Perhaps I am missing something here, so you basically PTS your best friend who can no longer be ridden to take on a rescue that most likely can't be ridden? Horses are not cars to be thrown on the scrap heap when they develop problems, all of my horses are with me for life as I realise that when a horse comes into our family then it is a lifelong partnership and commitment regardless of whether they become a field ornament through injury/illness/old age. The issue is breeding in the first place which has flooded the market, breeding needs to be somehow regulated.

Well done for trying to think of an idea to ease the crisis but I doubt you will get any supporting votes as this just isn't going to work and we are not all being softies, we are being responsible owners who are prepared to give a home for life to the horses that have given their lives to us.
Click to expand...

^ This.

And to add my personal opinion, no. My horses cannot be replaced, one with another like a broken car upgraded to a newer model. When the time comes that my sister outgrows her little Welsh and I choose to retire him, I'll keep him because I love him and because he's one of my best friends. I will feel no obligation to put to sleep a perfectly happy, healthy yet elderly pony to substitute him with a younger, similarly able pony in order to free up rescue space. He is mine, and I love him simply for who he is, not just because he's a horse who could be replaced with any other horse. He taught my baby sister to ride, spent years looking after her, was the only one who could make me smile when I lost my old mare and sets the best example to other horses. He is irreplaceable, whether or not he can be ridden, whether or not a younger horse could do with a home, and whether or not a financial incentive is offered. Quite simply, I love him - you can't put a price on that.
 
Evie91 said:
I tried to rehome a companion pony from various rescues - started looking in Jan, needed one by May - nothing suitable. RSPCA were useless, did not return my calls, despite me chasing and leaving messages, when I did speak to them, they said they had hundreds needing homes, but apparently did not have a small, mare (my requirements). In the end I gave up and bought a pony, three weeks before I 'needed' her. I am completely disillusioned with rescues!
Click to expand...

This makes me very sad. I think some charities are more in the business of taking donations money than in securing homes.
 
Nope. Mine are with me until (hopefully slightly before) they are no longer happy/healthy/field sound. If get another horse after that, it will be a horse I choose on the basis of breeding/talent/type. I'm another who would rather PTS unrideable animals clogging up rescues, than faithful old friends having a few happy retirement years with their owners.
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The rescue charities need to have a look at their re-homing criteria. Excellent experienced homes are being turned down because they use trimmers rather than farriers (because local farriers are ****!). They are being turned down because despite having excellent natural shelter they do not have a field shelter (they seem to manage without them in the wild!).

If they were to soften the criteria even a little it would open up many more re-homing possibilities. They might also look at whether, just because they don't feel it is safe for their staff to ride a particular horse, it might not mean that their isn't a very experienced horse-person out there who could take it on and manage it very well.

I've been in a position twice where I could have re-homed a charity horse but didn't even bother applying because I know they wouldn't accept me as a loaner.

ETA: I have a retired pony and love her to bits. She is with me until the end and I definately wouldn't have her 'scrapped'!
 
Ah in response to me. Not a chance. My horse has given me 13 yrs of pleasure. Just because I can't ride her doesn't mean she doesn't deserve a happy life munching grass. When she goes. I more than likely will rescue something. But she won't go to make way for something else. And nor will my 4yr old they are with me for life :)
 
Pearlsasinger said:
No the responsibility for these horses lies firmly with the people who owned them when they were 'rescued'. It certainly doesn't lie with those who have taken responsibility for their own old/infirm but not in pain animals, who wish to keep their old friends in the manner to which they have become accustomed for as long as they can.
We had a mare who was mostly unridden for 12 yrs because behaviour problems caused by food intolerances made her unreliable, as we could never guarantee that passers-by hadn't fed her. She was a perfect companion to her best friend, a happy valued member of our small herd, who was more than happy to spend time with any horse which had been left at home when the others went out and was actually a generally easy horse to keep and gentle personality.

Perhaps the charities should look at pts all those equines that they deem companion only when they are looking to place them in new homes. That would free up a LOT of space and resources to care for animals which can be worked.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely

Faracat said:
I absolutely would not have any of mine PTS before their time, because they could no longer be ridden (but were field sound and happy), to replace them with some random horse I have no connection with for an 'incentive'.

I actually find Cortez's suggestion less distasteful as long as 'pet' is counted as a purpose.
Click to expand...

I agree with this too.

I think that rescue places need to be more realistic about the horses they take on long term - and that is going to mean making some harsh decisions
 
Cortez said:
How about this? ALL horses which do not have a purpose should be put down; that would ease the horse crisis lickety split.
Click to expand...

Ever thought of becoming a dictator? You obviously don't believe in freedom or the right to choose and live your own life. What is wrong with me and others on this thread having a conscience and not seeing our horses as machines to be cast aside when they can no longer be ridden or driven?
 
NellRosk said:
Nope not for me either. If I had a sick or lame horse that was never going to get better, I would PTS that anyway to ease their suffering. But when my horses get old, providing they're still healthy and happy, then it is my duty to offer them a nice retirement.
Click to expand...


This 100%

My fifteen year old wb was retired at thirteen with KS, I got so many people saying sell her as a companion or just pts....why? She's mine, she came from a horrendous bad experience, I can and will afford to have her for as long as she is happy in retirement. If I can afford to have her retired then I will. And I hope I have a long one with her.
 
I too have had little success with rescues. I've been looking for some time for a pb shettie, up to 11hh to make a driving pair. DHP offered me a lame one, nothing anywhere local in RSPCA, eventually drove an horrendous 90 miles to Potters Bar to find the one they promised was 10.2 was well over that at 2yrs.
 
Seriously??
Would I have the 29 year old cushings boy but who acts and moves like a 4 year old and is a happy old fart put down to have in his place a rescue horse....NO way!!!

Ridiculous
 
You have a problem here. Most people on HHO, with a decent number of exceptions, have horses because we love them so we will stick with them through thick and thin. This for many of us involves having retirees or older, less mobile horses. There is no way in hell I would PTS any of my horses so I could have a younger model, unless they were no longer happy and comfortable. My boys aren't cars, I enjoy the duty and responsibility of caring for them no matter what.

I know there are also riders who ride because they love competing, so perhaps they would be more likely to PTS a retired horse if they didn't have the facilities. (No judgement here btw, I think most of us agree that PTS is far better than many other options) But I have almost never seen a rescue horse that showed enough talent to be competitive, so that market is gone too.

All in all, I think it's a terrible, terrible scheme that just encourages us to think of horses as throw-away things.
 
NellRosk said:
Nope not for me either. If I had a sick or lame horse that was never going to get better, I would PTS that anyway to ease their suffering. But when my horses get old, providing they're still healthy and happy, then it is my duty to offer them a nice retirement.
Click to expand...

This ^^^^ my horse has given me many years of pleasure and happiness and got me through some bad times in my life there is no way when his ridden days are over will I give up on him and just "kill" him off
 
I understand what you're getting at OP, but I wouldn't sign up for it myself. Unfortunately my boy is likely to succumb to his melanomas relatively quickly once they start being a problem, most likely before he gets to a proper retirement. He's pretty happy with his life now though so I don't lie awake worrying about it.

In terms of rescues, I think some of the smaller local rescues have much better policies and systems for rehoming. One near us has a network of volunteers who are well known and connected in their areas. They have no set criteria, but the volunteer will most likely know all the yards in an areas so will know if it's suitable for a certain type of horse. If they don't know they'll go to inspect. The same for owners. There's no 'official' vetting process but volunteers (themselves vetted closely) will know someone who knows them etc or will arrange to meet them. A friend of mine made tentative enquiries by phone about a rescue as a companion for her hose after her old mare died. It turned out the local volunteer was her next door neighbour (unbeknown to her) who was contacted that day and vouched for her and her set-up so she was told to visit the centre and pick a horse. She went the next day, took her trailer with her and brought him home that very same day 24hrs from start to finish. She was only really after a companion, and told them she'd take the horse that needed a home the most. They asked her to take an unbroken 4 year old as everybody wants older quiet horses. There was no reason he couldn't be ridden, they just didn't have the resources to start him and they had obviously been told she would cope with this sort of horse very well. He's now 7, very chilled and doing BE90 very successfully!
 
3OldPonies said:
Ever thought of becoming a dictator? You obviously don't believe in freedom or the right to choose and live your own life. What is wrong with me and others on this thread having a conscience and not seeing our horses as machines to be cast aside when they can no longer be ridden or driven?
Click to expand...

They have a job though, they make you happy so wouldn't come under Cortez's remit.
 
I wouldn't consider that either. I will keep my retired one until he is no longer field sound, which could easily be another 10 years plus. He's a lovely horse with a funny personality and he makes me laugh most days. Also he and the adopted one have an important job to do lol. They go in the paddock first and eat the grass down before my ridden one is allowed in there. They are Executive lawn mowers ☺️
 
NellRosk said:
Nope not for me either. If I had a sick or lame horse that was never going to get better, I would PTS that anyway to ease their suffering. But when my horses get old, providing they're still healthy and happy, then it is my duty to offer them a nice retirement.
Click to expand...
I couldnt have put it better myself
 
Don't think Cortez has really said anything too bad here.

As for the original question, I find it wrong on so many levels, but I do appreciate the reason for it being asked is good.

Put simply, for most, horses are not commodities, but a part of a persons family.

The main crux of the issue here is valuing one life over another. It's sticky ground. I will, as pretty much everyone on here knows, support the putting to sleep of animals that would otherwise suffer or be put into an uncertain situation. What I wouldn't do is apply pressure to anyone to do that or expect them to open their heart to another horse, for incentive or not.

Actually, I think offering an incentive is rather a dangerous concept. That creates a commodity, a rescue horse comes to have real value and that would be a massive concern for me. You have horses because you can afford it, you want them in your life and you take on the responsibility, not because you get a back hander or some sort of benefit.

I do understand the desire to find a solution, but this is not one that would be supported by me in any way.
 
Harsh I'm sure but I think many 'rescues' need to be modifying their intakes. The more sound, useful horses a rescue takes on, the more they can rehome, thus the more they can continue taking in. Taking on all these broken down animals that no one wants serves little purpose imo. A sob story only lasts so long.

I'd not give up my old guys. I think they are great and even if I don't do the same things with them as I do the younger horses, it doesn't matter as they still brighten my days.
 
southerncomfort said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The rescue charities need to have a look at their re-homing criteria. Excellent experienced homes are being turned down because they use trimmers rather than farriers (because local farriers are ****!). They are being turned down because despite having excellent natural shelter they do not have a field shelter (they seem to manage without them in the wild!).

If they were to soften the criteria even a little it would open up many more re-homing possibilities. They might also look at whether, just because they don't feel it is safe for their staff to ride a particular horse, it might not mean that their isn't a very experienced horse-person out there who could take it on and manage it very well.

I've been in a position twice where I could have re-homed a charity horse but didn't even bother applying because I know they wouldn't accept me as a loaner.

ETA: I have a retired pony and love her to bits. She is with me until the end and I definately wouldn't have her 'scrapped'!
Click to expand...

I had one from WHW and I don't remember them worrying when I took his shoes off. Neither did they worry about shelter in the field, although I did have a stable as well for him.

And for those saying the charities should PTS all the unrideables, well that would have deprived me of the wonderful 9 years I had with the boy who came to me from them as a companion for my horse.

I'm another who keeps my retired horses. Currently have one who was retired 4 years ago at 13 due to injury. He gives me an enormous amount of pleasure (and he is now a companion for my other lad).
 
Pebble101 said:
And for those saying the charities should PTS all the unrideables, well that would have deprived me of the wonderful 9 years I had with the boy who came to me from them as a companion for my horse.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think a horse/pony that is a good companion has a job and is valuable. I have one-he's a professional companion and therefore useful to me. He also costs very little to run!

To me a good companion can be left for finite periods of time, is relatively low maintenance and easy going with other horses. However, when I last looked there were horses being rehomed as companions that needed stabling, shoeing, rugging, not to be left alone, that were huge and not easy keepers. There might be a home for them somewhere but its unlikely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top