Pts & h&h!

[Kallibear]

I am very pro-PTS. In fact I'm also very pro-horsemeat too (with high welfare standards) because it would give all horses at least some value, and valued things are looked after better. But that's by the by.

There are far more horses than good homes. That's why there's thousands of horses who can't even be given away, never mind sold, and the charities are overflowing.

I an NOT Pro-PTS for horses who have nothing wrong with them, or have owners who are willing and able to keep them and care for them correctly. But passing the buck seriously p's me off. If your horse has such issues that you no longer want it :WHY THE HELL SHOULD SOMEONE ELSE BE EXPECTED TO WANT IT?!?! Stop kidding yourself that someone else out there is willing to put the time, effort and money into a valueless horse that you can't be bothered with. Stop telling yourself fairytales about all the wonderful caring homes that will be desperate to have your useless problem horse and take some responsibility for it's future. As many have said, there are far worse fates that being peacefully PTS at home.

And for those who think that online values differ from real life, we had a much loved horse PTS a few years ago for EXACTLY that reason. She has issues and problems that we couldn't fix, nor could the average horse owner. We didn't kid ourselves that the magical professional rider who might be able to sort her would appear to be her saviour. Instead she was far more likely to be passed from pillar to post in a downwards spiral. So her future was safeguarded by having her PTS.

 

[Patterdale]

I understand now there's parallel forum and people are straying across because I dont recognise any of the senarios listed above .

Well they were obviously made up as I'm not going to trawl back through the forum :rolleyes3: but this is the type of thing which happens all the time on here.
Hence people beginning to post about the amount of threads/comments on PTS.

 

[be positive]

I understand now there's parallel forum and people are straying across because I dont recognise any of the senarios listed above .

I was also confused about those scenarios, thanks for clarifying that there is a parallel forum, the examples may be tongue in cheek but I have seen no threads where pts is suggested for such minor issues, the main advice is to get professional help which is often all that is required.

 

[Polos Mum]

Well they were obviously made up as I'm not going to trawl back through the forum :rolleyes3: but this is the type of thing which happens all the time on here.
Hence people beginning to post about the amount of threads/comments on PTS.

Patterdale - the key bit you've missed from your examples are "I've got no insurance or money to do any vet investigations, I don't have the money to feed him properly/ get an instructor/ pay for proper livery and I want him gone for XYZ reason"
Of course with endless pockets there are plenty of option but most of the threads you'd hinted at start with a "I've got no money" caveat which rules out most of the non PTS options.

 

[Patterdale]

I was also confused about those scenarios, thanks for clarifying that there is a parallel forum, the examples may be tongue in cheek but I have seen no threads where pts is suggested for such minor issues, the main advice is to get professional help which is often all that is required.

Oh ok, don't know why so many people are saying the forum is so trigger happy and PTS obsessed then. I must be reading somewhere else.

 

[vanrim]

I absolutely agree with you. There are so many people who seem to think they can justify taking a horse on then not being prepared to see it through to retirement and all the extra cost involved.

Likely to be controversial but this is has bugged me about this forum for a while and a comment on another thread has prompted me to post!
My question is; why are there so many users on here who advocate pts for horses that are no longer as useful as they once were?
I know horses are expensive but I do struggle with the prevailing attitude on this forum, that as soon as a horse isn't useful you kill it ( with the added caveat that it's ok as the horse will never know).
I can only afford one horse, she is retired. I am envious of others going out and about doing stuff, when all I can do is brush my horse - but I wouldn't kill her ( or pay for someone else to do it because of this). I find it shocking that people think it's ok - for a horse that has given you the best years of its life, worked hard etc etc
Is this attitude a reflection on today's society, that as soon as something is no longer useful, it's considered disposable?

Fortunately for me, in real life I know plenty of people who have chosen to keep retired horses. I guess I feel I have a sense of responsibility to any animal I have chosen to take on - and sometimes chose to go without to ensure my animals care.

i'm not talking about those horses that are obviously in pain or suffering.

so what is it about this forum, that there seems to be a prevalence of people advocating pts?

p.s I know I'll likely to be called a bunny hugger - but I'm ok with that!

 

[Clare85]

I have to say, I find some of the comments on this thread about people who suggest pts being blood thirsty utterly ridiculous. I think some people need to open their eyes and see that we live in a pretty horrible world sometimes. The fact is, there are literally thousands of equines in this country who are being abused and neglected. You hear of more welfare cases every day. It is heartbreaking but it is fact. There simply aren't enough 'retirement' homes for old and infirm horses - companions are 10 a penny - people can't seem to give them away for love nor money. This is sad, it brings tears to my eyes actually when I see these oldies being offered up to new homes, with very few or no takers. If I had an elderly horse, I would not be able to send it away to a new home, with unknown sounds and smells and people, where it would be unlikely to settle easily. I think that would be cruel actually. I would personally keep it in retirement for as long as necessary - but that is just me, I'm not so blinkered that I think this would be an option for all.

In an ideal world everyone would keep their horses forever more until they die peacefully in their sleep in the sunshine in their field, surrounded by they horsey friends. Unfortunately we do not live in an ideal world. People's lives evolve, circumstances change which mean that people have to make tough decisions sometimes. I'm sure there are people out there who would put a horse down easily - but for the most part it is not an easy decision to make. I'm sure most of the people who put a horse down who could have years left of life feel guilt and anguish over it for a long time - however, I'm sure they would feel a hell of a lot worse if they managed to palm off their horse to someone else and then found that the horse had been mistreated or sold on or worse.

For me, I feel there is a much worse fate for a horse than a quick, painless death surrounded by people he knows and feeling safe and secure. Maybe some of you should go and have a look at the sales sometime - then you may understand that pts can be a mercy.

 

[Maesfen]

Absolutely this!

TBF, some people asking are newcomers to horses that don't realise they might have to make this decision at some time because it's just never entered their head although I always say it's one of the things you should think and plan for; what you'll do, who you'll use etc; it's a vital piece that goes along with responsible horse (or any animal) ownership and if you can't face it then don't buy in the first place. Animal husbandry can be hard, you have to get used to it when necessary, it's not your feelings that count but the quality of life for the animal.

 

[Auslander]

I actually find it illogical - and I say that as a competitive rider. I'm not amongst the best riders, so like many others in my position, my success in lower level affiliated competitions depends very much on the partnership with my horse. So I therefore find it totally illogical to then have the attitude towards that horse, with which you are trying to build, lets face it, a partnership which is based not purely on riding it, that it will be put it to sleep as soon as it is no longer capable of doing the job you have it for.

This must surely apply even more so to riders who don't compete, or compete infrequently - even hacking is all about the partnership you have with your horse. If you view that horse as a disposable item to be used while it is new and efficient, how does that work?

I do also think that any owner should think about doing things to facilitate the horse's retirement while it is in work. So if it doesn't like turnout, spend time getting it to accept turnout, and set things up so that turnout is possible and beneficial. If the horse doesn't cope with rest, how on earth do you periodise its training and competition phase? Any athlete is going to get injured if it trains all year round without breaks. If you don't think rehoming will be possible because it doesn't hack, spend time teaching it to hack safely. Obviously, there will be horses out there who simply cannot learn these things, but there is little excuse for not thinking it and not trying.

I certainly don't believe in not pts old and infirm horses, or horses who are heavily medicated. But I don't really agree with ending natural healthy lives due to convenience. Older horses give such pleasure, and you can learn so much from them.

What? You seem to have taken every single thing I've said, and twisted it completely. are you actually responding to my post, or just generalising, because if this is directed at me, you've completely misunderstood everything I said.

I don't put horses to sleep just because they are no longer any use to me. if I did, I wouldn't have 4 retired/semi retired horses costing an arm and a leg to feed, and spend hours of my time looking after them.

 

[Goldenstar]

I actually find it illogical - and I say that as a competitive rider. I'm not amongst the best riders, so like many others in my position, my success in lower level affiliated competitions depends very much on the partnership with my horse. So I therefore find it totally illogical to then have the attitude towards that horse, with which you are trying to build, lets face it, a partnership which is based not purely on riding it, that it will be put it to sleep as soon as it is no longer capable of doing the job you have it for.

This must surely apply even more so to riders who don't compete, or compete infrequently - even hacking is all about the partnership you have with your horse. If you view that horse as a disposable item to be used while it is new and efficient, how does that work?

I do also think that any owner should think about doing things to facilitate the horse's retirement while it is in work. So if it doesn't like turnout, spend time getting it to accept turnout, and set things up so that turnout is possible and beneficial. If the horse doesn't cope with rest, how on earth do you periodise its training and competition phase? Any athlete is going to get injured if it trains all year round without breaks. If you don't think rehoming will be possible because it doesn't hack, spend time teaching it to hack safely. Obviously, there will be horses out there who simply cannot learn these things, but there is little excuse for not thinking it and not trying.

I certainly don't believe in not pts old and infirm horses, or horses who are heavily medicated. But I don't really agree with ending natural healthy lives due to convenience. Older horses give such pleasure, and you can learn so much from them.

I put to sleep a horse quite young who would not turnout .
She was one of my favorite horses ever I think she was only fourteen.
I had tried very hard to teach her turn out from the day she arrived but she never improved very much .
She was sufficently stressy about turnout that I felt that I could not let her go to be a brood mare I felt she might have taught her foals the same attitude so despite her good completive record her fabulous nature and very good breeding we did not go that route
It was sad she was not happy not working although she would not have had a long retirement she had displaced a bone in her knee and the knee was arthritic .
I don't know why she hated turnout but she did .

 

[be positive]

Oh ok, don't know why so many people are saying the forum is so trigger happy and PTS obsessed then. I must be reading somewhere else.

There have been a few where pts has been suggested, I do not read all the threads so obviously may miss some, and several where the horse has been pts and the owner comes on to get assurance that they have done the correct thing by the horse when I have felt rather uncomfortable because possibly not enough has been done to look at why pts is the answer. Most have been thoroughly examined by vets, the only one recently that I did feel was very quick was the loan horse that went lame and was pts a few days later without a vet being involved. If I thought the wrong decision had been made I will make no comment, it is none of my business and why try and make someone feel guilty when the deed is already done.
Most people see it as the very last resort for either physical or behavioural issues, there was one several years ago that was very difficult, aggressive and the owner explored many avenues before having him pts, most posters would have done it earlier , was the owner right to keep a troubled horse, get herself injured in the process trying to get to the bottom of what was a dangerous horse living a very sad life?

 

[khalswitz]

I'm probably one of the ones that pee's you guys off. I don't tend to post advocating PTS as I think that is a very difficult decision that you have to come to yourself, but equally I have posted before saying that if a horse was unrideable, whether due to lameness or age etc, I would PTS it. My personal situation is that I want to ride - selfish as that might be - and I don't have the money for two. This doesn't stop me having a great relationship with a horse, but ultimately I look upon horses a bit like relationships - if it's not right, it's not right, and if the horse isn't sellable then PTS is the only option (I have rehomed previously but only to previous owners etc, I would never rehome to someone I didn't know).

My background is that I've worked in riding schools, where horses *have* to earn their keep, and if lame/unsellable then they were PTS, I have also worked for a welfare charity, and trained at vet school before working in the equine health profession. The combination has shown me that you have to draw a line somewhere, and I would rather the buck ended with me.

If a horse is sound enough to do a job, or an actual good companion type (so many are rehomed as companions who are not suitable for it!), then fair enough. But I wouldn't stop riding and carry on paying the phenomenal livery I do for a horse that couldn't do what I wanted, whether it was lack of scope, temperament, unrideably lame or just not the right horse for me - I view them all in the same bracket, just that for an unrideable horse you have fewer options.

However, if I had the money, and the land, I'd love to retire all my lame horses and just enjoy their company - and I respect those of you who do in a way I don't think you respect me for the decisions I make.

Equally, I always buy young/younger horses, and tend to sell on once they hit 12-14 anyway, so I've never had to actually retire a horse that was sound. My decision has been over younger, lame horses. Personally I wouldn't buy an older horse because I couldn't offer it a retirement, and you do have to plan ahead as best you can.

 

[Booboos]

TBF though, and I'm sure this counts as inflammatory but WTH, this also applies to babies but no one would see this as an acceptable reason for justifying them pts (just to point out a little double standard) ...

Not exactly the case as babies have the potential to develop into beings that have an understanding of the future, etc. Babies live in the now, but they have a future in which they do have the possibility of understanding more which is why we try to protect their right to an open future.

 

[Goldenstar]

Well they were obviously made up as I'm not going to trawl back through the forum :rolleyes3: but this is the type of thing which happens all the time on here.
Hence people beginning to post about the amount of threads/comments on PTS.

Well perhaps you ought to trawl back before accusing those who disagree with your point of view with having extreme views .
It's the sort of thing that leaders of totalitarian regimes do to discredit those who disagree with them .

 

[Ibblebibble]

Well they were obviously made up as I'm not going to trawl back through the forum :rolleyes3: but this is the type of thing which happens all the time on here.
Hence people beginning to post about the amount of threads/comments on PTS.

if they are happening all the time , it shouldn't take any trawling to find some examples!

IF ..... IF you are in a position to offer your long standing horse/pony a long and happy retirement, then kudos to you. I`m sure most of us want the best for our horses, whether we have had them 2 minutes or 20 years. But i tell you now, putting to sleep a horse at home, when it is old, lame, has behavioural issues, or is no longer useful, in todays saturated market, should NOT be made out to be a bad thing.

totally agree ^^^

 

[LittleRooketRider]

i don't think everybody thinks pts is the only option I think the general consensus is that there are worse outcomes...when my old girl fully retires (now 23) she will live ot her days in want of nothing a good field, company (her daughter) and a good stable in winter...nothing will change in the quality of her care from when she was in full work but when the time comes ie. she is suffering/struggling or if she struggled the previous winter I will pts.

i will second those who say most situations when pts have been suggested/supported is when the horse is no longer wanted/cannot be kept... i personally will make a point of making sure the OP knows that pts is not the worst outcome because i want them to feel supported when they could quite possibly be feeling their worst

 

[Patterdale]

Well perhaps you ought to trawl back before accusing those who disagree with your point of view with having extreme views .
It's the sort of thing that leaders of totalitarian regimes do to discredit those who disagree with them .

Darn, you've caught me out. I am really the leader of a totalitarian regime, just on HHO for ****s and giggles.

Well, back to world domination :rolleyes3:

 

[lunarlove]

I have a horse that I have posted about on here many times, he is a complete metal wreck, been re-homed a million times, beaten severly (neither by myself), has issues with the farrier, loading, doesnt tie up, being caught, being led (he bolts), he has several medical issues and I am fighting with my contious every day, I'm keeping him going on the hope that when weather conditions improve I can get him going again in the lighter evenings when my partner can have the kids, he is 17 now and the general opinion on here and from everyone that knows us was to have him PTS as he is too far gone. One half of me is determined to fix him but the other half of cant bare to see the sad look in his eye and beleive he would be better off PTS. Im giving him till the end of this summer to try and get the best out of him and rebuild some trust and get a SAFE relationship but if we are still where we are now I refuse to put him through this any more and spend a fortune keeping him going through the winter never really knowing what his mental state is so he will be PTS and it completely breaks my heart to make this decision. This may make me a bad person in which case, so be it but Im sure some might say that even keeping him going this long is unfair!!

 

[Evie91]

I started this thread as I was putting off doing the cleaning! Now finished and back online. Thanks for the responses, this has made for very interesting reading
I did not start this to be inflammatory but as someone who lurks more than they post it has struck me the amount of pts threads. I too am fed up of seeing horses advertised for sale in their twenties, as companions etc. I also find it strange that in dire circumstances people would choose to ask the opinion of strangers on a forum.
I would never advocate a horse suffering ( as I do think I said in my original post) and can understand pts in those circumstances.
I am heartened to read about those who also keep their equines in retirement. I guess my opinion has been skewed by reading some threads were it does seem everyone jumps on the bandwagon to put to sleep.
I guess the disposable nature of animals per se is something I struggle with, maybe I am naive but I do still strongly feel that if you take on responsibility for an animal you need to stick by it through thick and thin.
I also think there are worse things than pts and people passing on their problem horses is also another bug bear of mine!
Thanks for the replies, I do like a good debate

 

[Polos Mum]

Well I'm just back in from putting mine to bed and my big horse thinks he may as well be PTS as life is SO unfair, his companion pony next door (with no teeth) gets a big bucket of soaked grass nuts now and he gets ONLY a token handful JUST because he's a solid irish mutt on ad lib hay and next to no work !!!!

Surely PTS is better than that injustice!

(joking!!, he's just been bugging me as I skip out and it made me giggle)

 

[Magnetic Sparrow]

I also find it strange that in dire circumstances people would choose to ask the opinion of strangers on a forum.

Actually, I'm not that surprised tbh. If I was desperate to find an alternative to pts and couldn't think of anything, I'd quite like to ask a whole bunch of knowledgeable people if they had some ideas I hadn't thought of.

I'm off to the thread nearby to see if some good ideas appear...

 

[touchstone]

I believe everyone 'jumps on the bandwagon,' i.e. offers their opinion to pts, because there are an estimated 7.000 (IIRC) unwanted equines in the uk. When you've been to low end sales and seen what goes on there and seen neglected animals in a state, then pts is certainly a reasonable option. For many there are no alternatives if they aren't able to financially support their horse for whatever reason. Sticking with a horse through thick and thin may involve your family going without if you have children to support and I'd question if that was the right thing to do.

 

[zigzag]

I am one of these people who will take on an oldie... Took a pony on in April, for my daughter, pony a bit thin but was being picked on by the herd (trekking/riding school couldn't cope with the work) pony was fab, (apart from not staying in a stable) in July he got colic, bleeding in intestine, did recover but was never the same, in November he became ill again, I PTS, vet suspected lymphoma internally, also reckoned that's why he was thin when I had him (also found out later the pony was much older than they said) Previous owners must have know there was something up when they gave him to me, it ended up costing me nearly a £1000 in vets bills as well as the heartbreak of losing a pony.

I now have another pony on loan/gifted to me, I suspect she is much older than they said... plus was also told pony can go back at any time if it didn't work out, but suspect that they wouldn't as they have not inquired how she is doing or replied to any messages I have sent them. Luckily nothing wrong with pony and will hopefully last by daughter til she outgrows her, however if my daughter is still riding/wants to ride I cannot afford two, so doubt I will be able to rehome a 28ish year old, she will be PTS so I can afford another pony for my daughter, if of course my daughter no longer likes riding at anytime, I will retire the mare unless of course I lost my job then family comes first and pony will be PTS

 

[sarahann1]

I have two oldies, both totally retired, I've been lucky in so far as they are still happily retired and field sound mostly without meds. I will not, however, pass them on to anyone if I'm unlucky enough to fall on very hard times, they will both be pts.

Hopefully no hard times will come my way, and they'll go when they are at the stage when quality of life is beginning to be a question mark. While it's not what I would do personally I also understand those who give retired horses a summer then call it quits and move on. What I cannot abide is those who keep old, lame, sick, miserable horses going and try an palm off the problem onto someone else.

 

[Wagtail]

I don't think there are really any posters (at least that I've seen) who are keen to promote pts as an option, but I think there are quite a few of us (me included) who think that pts is a much better course of action than some options that allow the horse to live longer.

I've seen too many elderly horses who are living out their final years without the attention and care they so obviously crave, kept alive but miserable and suffering because their owners 'love them too much' to do the decent thing and let them go.

When my first horse was turned away to see if time would allow him to come right, he used to refuse to be turned out after I brought him in to check him over properly and groom and feed him. The only way I got him back out to the field without a fight was to slap a saddle on and ride him round at walk for 10 minutes. That altered my perspective on horses forever. Once we have domesticated them their expectations for their lives are no longer that of a wild horse. We must respect what we have made.

I salute people who keep happy horses alive when they no longer have a job to do. However people like you, OP, are in a minority imho.

I beg to differ. There does seem a majority culture on here that PTS is a good option. Sometimes they are right, but all too often they are rather hasty.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

There is very much a sickening rush to suggest PTS on here when a poster asks for advice but has not suggested euthanasia.
Funny how the people who rush to suggest euthanasia can't recall them.

Some responses on this thread are just silly. NO ONE is saying that PTS when it is in a horse's best interests is wrong.
It is wrong when the owner is irresponsible and simply wants to get rid of an unwanted animal because they're bored. Or when they just want rid so they can buy and mess up another horse.

Horses may not know that they are about to die (unless they are packed off to a slaughter house), but does make it any more justifiable ? Is the life of any sentient being so worthless that it can be snuffed out on a whim ?

 

[Goldenstar]

There is very much a sickening rush to suggest PTS on here when a poster asks for advice but has not suggested euthanasia.
Funny how the people who rush to suggest euthanasia can't recall them.

Some responses on this thread are just silly. NO ONE is saying that PTS when it is in a horse's best interests is wrong.
It is wrong when the owner is irresponsible and simply wants to get rid of an unwanted animal because they're bored. Or when they just want rid so they can buy and mess up another horse.

Horses may not know that they are about to die (unless they are packed off to a slaughter house), but does make it any more justifiable ? Is the life of any sentient being so worthless that it can be snuffed out on a whim ?

Perhaps you would like to but up some links to some threads .

 

[Spring Feather]

Perhaps you would like to but up some links to some threads .

You know there have been lots. You (and I and most of the other posters in this thread) have participated in those threads. There's no need for HR to link to the threads because we all know which ones they are.

OP, I also notice this happening a disproportionate amount on this forum. It's so odd and it does take me aback at times because I just don't know people like this in real life. I can't put my finger on why it happens here but you're right, it does.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

Perhaps you would like to but up some links to some threads .

Can't quite believe you've forgotten already. You posted several times recently on one example.

 

[Patterdale]

You know there have been lots. You (and I and most of the other posters in this thread) have participated in those threads. There's no need for HR to link to the threads because we all know which ones they are.

OP, I also notice this happening a disproportionate amount on this forum. It's so odd and it does take me aback at times because I just don't know people like this in real life. I can't put my finger on why it happens here but you're right, it does.

Can't quite believe you've forgotten already. You posted several times recently on one example.

Thank you, thought it wasn't just me...!