Left on the verge: The approaching equine crisis in England and Wales

[Moomin1]

I shall not be donating ANYTHING to the RSPCA kitty.......As Moomin herself told me all RSPCA centres are "franchises" that run under the name of the RSPCA, and are not funded by them...they have to fund themselves.
And Maesfen is spot on......there will always be the odd exception, but for the main part, to give the younger healthy animals a chance, the older, lame and unhomable animals ought to be euthenised.

No, they are the cat and dog rehoming shelters. The wildlife and equine ARE the National Society.

 

[Cuffey]

Part of the problem with charities been overfilled is the time it takes to bring prosecution cases to court, think how long the Grays horses were in care before they could be rehomed.
I am aware of a NI case where 60 horses were removed nearly a year ago, the case has not been to court and the dealer is trading across the water again

http://www.redwings.org.uk/news-irishrescue.php

 

[Moggy in Manolos]

I think alot of the problem stems from two things - horses are way too cheap to obtain, and the gross lack of knowledge in so many people who buy them. I have tried and tried to explain that buying the horse and all tack etc is the CHEAPEST stage of owning a horse. They cost all of that and usually more EVERY year to keep. Plenty of people are shocked that I visited my horse twice a day every day and even lots of owners I know only see theirs once a day and rely on some other sucker casting an eye and letting them know if there is a problem. I even knew one person who drove past the yard every morning on the way to work but her horse only saw once a day at the very most. It often went days between visits, because it was turned out 24.7 so she didn't HAVE to come down to muck out etc.

Once the novelty has worn off things can get very slapdash. Winter is a good test of peoples' dedication - when your wellies have frozen to the yard while you are waiting for the buckets to fill (as has happened to me when it was -16 morning and evening) you know for sure whether you really want a horse or not! Declining standards leads to neglect. I think a "throwaway" society doesn't help. Animals are seen as accessories, not living breathing entities, hence chav-man has a staffie on a lead. He doesn't care about the dog, just his image. Poor dog gets goaded, kicked, chained up all day, teased in front of his mates, yelled at. Now think how many horses you know get the same treatment because I can think of quite a few.

Very well put fatpiggy, sad but very true
It is shocking how cheap you can buy a horse for, and the amount of indiscriminate breeding gets right on my wick

 

[Fenris]

The claim that it is necessary to keep animals pending the outcome of a trial is incorrect. S.20 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 allows an application to court to allow the destruction or disposal of animals that have been seized.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/section/20

The owner of the animals can object and even appeal.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/section/21

Unfortunately the application is a civil application in the Magistrates court and so there is no legal aid available to assist an owner.

This provision was put into the Act so that commercial animals would not lose their value by being kept past their sell by date. The problem is that the RSPCA has been using it to apply to 'dispose' of pet animals, sometimes belonging to the old or vulnerable defendant who has no means of defending against such an application before there have even been criminal charges issued.

Ask yourselves how you would feel if you came out of a criminal trial having been found Not Guilty, but now had no animals to come home? This has been happening and the SHG is very aware of the huge insjustices that are being done, not only to the people involved but to the animals themselves who are being snatched from good homes and either killed or rehomed for no good reason.

 

[Moomin1]

The claim that it is necessary to keep animals pending the outcome of a trial is incorrect. S.20 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 allows an application to court to allow the destruction or disposal of animals that have been seized.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/section/20

The owner of the animals can object and even appeal.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/section/21

Unfortunately the application is a civil application in the Magistrates court and so there is no legal aid available to assist an owner.

This provision was put into the Act so that commercial animals would not lose their value by being kept past their sell by date. The problem is that the RSPCA has been using it to apply to 'dispose' of pet animals, sometimes belonging to the old or vulnerable defendant who has no means of defending against such an application before there have even been criminal charges issued.

Ask yourselves how you would feel if you came out of a criminal trial having been found Not Guilty, but now had no animals to come home? This has been happening and the SHG is very aware of the huge insjustices that are being done, not only to the people involved but to the animals themselves who are being snatched from good homes and either killed or rehomed for no good reason.

Groan........

With a 98% conviction success rate there's very few people who actually get found not guilty!

If the courts award a S20 for the RSPCA to 'dispose' of animals then I'm afraid it's for a very good reason. A court wouldn't simply allow the destruction or rehoming of someone's animal willy nilly.

Can I ask you a serious question now Fenris, do you support animal neglect and cruelty?! If not, do you not think that it's fair and just that the perpetrators are brought to justice in a magistrates court? Or should they just be allowed to get away with it?

I'm not talking about the RSPCA here, but any organisation/body undertaking prosecutions.

 

[FairyLights]

Done. Very easy form to fill in. My MP has now received the email.

 

[Bobbly]

Absolutely and until they start behaving responsibly themselves by putting down any ill or lame horse that can never recover from their injuries/illness/neglect which find their way to them then I for one will not throw good money after bad.

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee folks whether that is palatable to you or not. Charities waste far too much money and time on animals that will never get better; far better to focus their energies and funds on those that are viable for re-homing than those that are a waste of money and resources. Until they do this there will always be full homes with no spaces available for those genuinely in need. I'm for the badger cull too before farmers are forced out of business altogether and we end up importing poor quality milk from other countries while consumers wail and gnash why we haven't got our own milking herds any longer.

Hear hear, totally agree with you on this one!!

 

[Moomin1]

Hear hear, totally agree with you on this one!!

As I mentioned earlier (I think!), a lot of charities are, and have been for a while, pts-ing horses with injuries, old age, sweet itch or lami problems. Some people don't like it, and a lot of criticism gets thrown, but it needs to be done.

I am surprised people think that the big charities aren't doing this already?

 

[DuckToller]

And Maesfen is spot on......there will always be the odd exception, but for the main part, to give the younger healthy animals a chance, the older, lame and unhomable animals ought to be euthenised.

I thought I was in a tiny minority thinking this.

It seems madness that some charities are full up with the old, sick and lame, and won't make room for the youngsters that badly need their help. There needs to be some hard but sensible thinking done on this front.

 

[DuckToller]

As I mentioned earlier (I think!), a lot of charities are, and have been for a while, pts-ing horses with injuries, old age, sweet itch or lami problems. Some people don't like it, and a lot of criticism gets thrown, but it needs to be done.

I am surprised people think that the big charities aren't doing this already?

Sorry, didn't see this before I posted - am relieved if they are. Not that I think all oldies should be routinely pts, but something has to give at the moment.

 

[scribble]

people also breed far too much from horse that really should nt be bred from because they want thier mare to have a foal. we should be breeding smaller numbers of good quality stock not just putting a mare in foal to produce a foal. That is also why travellers breed so many as they know that someone will take pity on it and buy it.

 

[Moobucket]

On a more positive note, has anyone else volunteered to be a blue cross fosterer? I was just wondering what it involved?

 

[Laafet]

I've not read all of the thread but those going on about low cost euthanasia being available, well we have the EU to thank for that and the last Government. Before the Ban it cost virtually nothing to have your horse put down by the hunt, it cost me a hunt supporter with a horse on no drugs £150 about 2 or 3 years ago, and a year or so before that £350 for the vet to do it and take care of the body from a really bad colic (badly dealt with by the vet and by the knackerman but that is a whole different story). A horse is a big body and it is hard to dispose of, sorry to be blunt but very true.
Horses are too easy to buy I am not sure why, I suppose it is because it has been so cheap to buy one, but buying a horse is not the problem it is keeping it that is the high cost reality. Something which a hell of a lot of people don't seem to realise these days.

 

[Fenris]

Groan........

With a 98% conviction success rate there's very few people who actually get found not guilty!

If the courts award a S20 for the RSPCA to 'dispose' of animals then I'm afraid it's for a very good reason. A court wouldn't simply allow the destruction or rehoming of someone's animal willy nilly.

Can I ask you a serious question now Fenris, do you support animal neglect and cruelty?! If not, do you not think that it's fair and just that the perpetrators are brought to justice in a magistrates court? Or should they just be allowed to get away with it?

I'm not talking about the RSPCA here, but any organisation/body undertaking prosecutions.

Where you get the 98% success rate puzzles everyone who follows cases that arrive at the SHG and which are referred to the few specialist solicitors. It is very easy to persuade an elderly or ill person with no legal representation to plead guilty but not so easy to pull the wool over the eyes of someone who has seen a proper defence expert witness report and taken legal advice.

Nevertheless, I accept that you will not take my word or views on this, so try a quote from a peer reviewed paper :

http://theshg.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/government-plans-to-microchip-dogs-has-no-evidential-support/

Despite the plethora of legislation since the nineteenth century, there remains little systematic statistical evidence regarding trends and patterns in recorded animal abuse. As Pierpoint and Maher ([35] pp.485-6) note, the little that is known about the prevalence of reported animal abuse is derived from court records and animal welfare charities. Throughout this period it would appear that the RSPCA has consistently brought the majority of prosecutions to the courts. However, there is a major evidential hole awaiting any attempt to assess systematically the trends in prevalence of animal abuse both over time and cross-sectionally at any given time in Britain. Most significantly, it was accepted by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in the post-legislative assessment of AWA in December 2010 that there was no national enforcement database regarding the enforcement of the Act despite the original intention of this being part of a regulatory impact assessment [11].
Furthermore, animal cruelty offences recorded by the police are not collected by the Home Office – we therefore have little other than anecdotal testimony in the absence of sustained criminological research to rely on in dealing with the seeming growth in the problem, for example, of abuse of dogs and their
involvement in crime and anti-social behaviour (see Hughes et al. [26]).

 

[Moomin1]

Where you get the 98% success rate puzzles everyone who follows cases that arrive at the SHG and which are referred to the few specialist solicitors. It is very easy to persuade an elderly or ill person with no legal representation to plead guilty but not so easy to pull the wool over the eyes of someone who has seen a proper defence expert witness report and taken legal advice.

Nevertheless, I accept that you will not take my word or views on this, so try a quote from a peer reviewed paper :

http://theshg.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/government-plans-to-microchip-dogs-has-no-evidential-support/

Despite the plethora of legislation since the nineteenth century, there remains little systematic statistical evidence regarding trends and patterns in recorded animal abuse. As Pierpoint and Maher ([35] pp.485-6) note, the little that is known about the prevalence of reported animal abuse is derived from court records and animal welfare charities. Throughout this period it would appear that the RSPCA has consistently brought the majority of prosecutions to the courts. However, there is a major evidential hole awaiting any attempt to assess systematically the trends in prevalence of animal abuse both over time and cross-sectionally at any given time in Britain. Most significantly, it was accepted by the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in the post-legislative assessment of AWA in December 2010 that there was no national enforcement database regarding the enforcement of the Act despite the original intention of this being part of a regulatory impact assessment [11].
Furthermore, animal cruelty offences recorded by the police are not collected by the Home Office – we therefore have little other than anecdotal testimony in the absence of sustained criminological research to rely on in dealing with the seeming growth in the problem, for example, of abuse of dogs and their
involvement in crime and anti-social behaviour (see Hughes et al. [26]).

Save your breath Fenris, your 'few specialist solicitors' have defended some horrendous out and out neglect and despicable cruelty that would quite frankly make the members of HHO nearly explode with disgust.

If you are the sort of person who shows the same sort of support to those sorts of 'people' then you are not much better than them.

 

[Fenris]

Save your breath Fenris, your 'few specialist solicitors' have defended some horrendous out and out neglect and despicable cruelty that would quite frankly make the members of HHO nearly explode with disgust.

If you are the sort of person who shows the same sort of support to those sorts of 'people' then you are not much better than them.

By all means sink to the level of personal abuse, but if you ignore the facts and properly collated evidence from independent researchers then your bias is showing.

Every accused has the right to defend themselves. If you are asking for or supporting guilt on accusation then we are back in the age of the witch hunt.

 

[cptrayes]

Agree, I think that would be a good start.

Not sure about other charities, but RSPCA officers are trained and licenced to use free bullet and captive bolt (but obv the latter is not for horses)

Captive bolt is used on horses Moomin. Mine was put down with a captive bolt gun in May this year.

 

[Moomin1]

By all means sink to the level of personal abuse, but if you ignore the facts and properly collated evidence from independent researchers then your bias is showing.

Every accused has the right to defend themselves. If you are asking for or supporting guilt on accusation then we are back in the age of the witch hunt.

Ha ha!! Your response doesn't surprise me one iota.

Where and when have I said that I support guilt on accusation or that people don't deserve a fair trial?!!

The 98% success rate is the CONVICTION success rate, not the percentage of people who plead guilty!

Knowing the sort of horrors that your 'specialist' solicitors defend (which fair enough, they are just doing their job) I find it pretty unbelievable that the likes of yourself can actually imply that the majority or high number of people taken to court are in fact innocent little old dears who have loved and cherished their dear little pets and never put a foot wrong.

The 'specialist' solicitors you speak of didn't do so well in getting the likes of Lesley Skipper off the hook did they?

I assume given your support for these poor innocent people who have done nothing but look after their horses to the highest standard (huh-hum), that you feel that they were treated terribly unfairly by the RSPCA and should of infact been allowed to keep their very well cared for horses and sued the RSPCA for harrassment?!...Yes?!!

 

[Moomin1]

Captive bolt is used on horses Moomin. Mine was put down with a captive bolt gun in May this year.

They can be used but they shouldn't be due to the health and safety risk. Horses have a tendency to lurch forwards when shot or bolted, and the bolt can then drag the person's arm downwards as the horse falls. That's the only reason they shouldn't be used.

 

[cptrayes]

They can be used but they shouldn't be due to the health and safety risk. Horses have a tendency to lurch forwards when shot or bolted, and the bolt can then drag the person's arm downwards as the horse falls. That's the only reason they shouldn't be used.

Sorry, who says they shouldn't be used? Many hunts use them and I have held several horses which have been shot with them by huntsmen and by knacker men with no problems whatsoever. As I said, mine was shot with one by an experienced huntsman in May of this year and he is still using the same gun to despatch other horses.

 

[cptrayes]

Just to add - as long as the horse is a meat animal there is no welfare issue with overproduction. They can be shot and eaten, either by the French or by dogs, it matters no more than the fact that we shoot and eat cows. I won't be signing any petitions or writing to any MPs

 

[Moomin1]

Sorry, who says they shouldn't be used? Many hunts use them and I have held several horses which have been shot with them by huntsmen and by knacker men with no problems whatsoever. As I said, mine was shot with one by an experienced huntsman in May of this year and he is still using the same gun to despatch other horses.

Why so defensive?!!

I never said they can't be used?

I have explained why ideally they shouldn't be used, for health and safety reasons. If your local huntsman wants to use one, and doesn't mind that slight risk, then fine. Who cares?!!

 

[Moomin1]

Just to add - as long as the horse is a meat animal there is no welfare issue with overproduction. They can be shot and eaten, either by the French or by dogs, it matters no more than the fact that we eat cows.

And of course the meat import/export trade with horses is not a welfare issue at all is it?!

Pointless comment Cptrayes, because at the end of the day we don't eat horses over here so they are not slaughtered en mass!!

 

[cptrayes]

Why so defensive?!!

I never said they can't be used?

I have explained why ideally they shouldn't be used, for health and safety reasons. If your local huntsman wants to use one, and doesn't mind that slight risk, then fine. Who cares?!!

Ah, OK I get it.

You say that a captive bolt gun should not be used on a horse and when called out on it you accuse the caller of being defensive.

Good one !

 

[cptrayes]

And of course the meat import/export trade with horses is not a welfare issue at all is it?!

Pointless comment Cptrayes, because at the end of the day we don't eat horses over here so they are not slaughtered en mass!!

Not pointless at all. We export dead horse meat and we put most of it in tins of pet food. Dead meat export is not a welfare issue, no. Neither is putting it in tins. If you think we do not slaughter horses en masse you are unaware of the daily business done by at low end auctions and by the horse abattoirs in this country.

 

[Moomin1]

Ah, OK I get it.

You say that a captive bolt gun should not be used on a horse and when called out on it you accuse the caller of being defensive.

Good one!

Jeez what's your problem?!!

No, it is not ME that says that, it is in the Euthanasia guidelines that many vets use. It is not a safe method of pts with horses.

If your huntsman wants to take the risk, I couldn't care less. Does it really matter that much to you?!

And with regard the horse meat trade - it is pointless, because how many horses do you know that pass through slaughterhouses, in comparison to cows (which you did compare to), for the meat trade?! Do you honestly think that is going to make a dent in a country who breeds horses for profit and leisure use?!

 

[cptrayes]

Jeez what's your problem?!!

No, it is not ME that says that, it is in the Euthanasia guidelines that many vets use. It is not a safe method of pts with horses.

If your huntsman wants to take the risk, I couldn't care less. Does it really matter that much to you?!

And with regard the horse meat trade - it is pointless, because how many horses do you know that pass through slaughterhouses, in comparison to cows (which you did compare to), for the meat trade?! Do you honestly think that is going to make a dent in a country who breeds horses for profit and leisure use?!

Yes, it matters to me if you tell people on this forum that a captive bolt gun should not be used to kill a horse and then they have to watch in fear while the knackerman who has come to kill their horse brings out a perfectly safe and effective captive bolt gun to do the job with.


1. Vets make a lot of money from putting horses down by injection. They rarely, these days, ever shoot a horse. Of course they won't want to advise their members to use a gun of any kind, it would ruin a valuable revenue stream for them.

2. It does not matter a fig how many cows are killed. The fact is that there is no welfare issue in having too many leisure horses bred in this country as long as a lively meat market exists, which it does.

 

[Moomin1]

You ain't big on reasoned discussion tonight, are you Moomin?

1. Vets make a lot of money from putting horses down by injection. They rarely, these days, ever shoot a horse. Of course they won't want to advise their memeber to use a gun of any kind.

2. It does not matter a fig how many cows are killed. The fact is that there is no welfare issue in having too many leisure horses bred in this country as long as a lively meat market exists, which it does.

But the FACT is that the 'meat' market with regard leisure horses isn't lively - otherwise we wouldn't be overflowing with unwanted horses!! Why on earth would people just dump their horses rather than go and get a bit of dosh for meat?!!

 

[Moomin1]

Yes, it matters to me if you tell people on this forum that a captive bolt gun should not be used to kill a horse and then they have to watch in fear while the knackerman who has come to kill their horse brings out a perfectly safe and effective captive bolt gun to do the job with.


1. Vets make a lot of money from putting horses down by injection. They rarely, these days, ever shoot a horse. Of course they won't want to advise their members to use a gun of any kind, it would ruin a valuable revenue stream for them.

2. It does not matter a fig how many cows are killed. The fact is that there is no welfare issue in having too many leisure horses bred in this country as long as a lively meat market exists, which it does.

Oh fgs cptrayes - I SAID IT IS NOT SAFE FOR THE PERSON PTS-ING the horse! Not that it's not safe or effective for the horse!

 

[cptrayes]

But the FACT is that the 'meat' market with regard leisure horses isn't lively - otherwise we wouldn't be overflowing with unwanted horses!! Why on earth would people just dump their horses rather than go and get a bit of dosh for meat?!!

Because they haven't got transport to take them to the market or the abattoir? Because they can't be bothered?

There IS a market for horsemeat Moomin, ring your nearest horse abattoir and ask them their price per kilo and they will tell you.

We aren't "overflowing" with unwanted horses. We may be overflowing with horses that people think are worth more than their meat value, but that's different altogether.