RESPONSE TO URGENT HELP NEEDED

Blue2006 said:
We are all going to disagree over when it is prudent to put a horse to sleep. It is an extremely emotive topic however the deliberate and vitriolic defamation of character that went with this particular post was totally inappropriate.
Click to expand...

I am not agreeing or disagreeing about whether a horse should be PTS. The issue I think many had was the callous attitude shown to the horse owner where the horse was not allowed to be PTS with dignity. Unless you are on here to point out that the story is incorrect and horse was not PTS on the side of a road there is no need to bring this subject up again. I know the yard in question would never have my business if thats how the clients are treated.
 
YO takes money from clients to look after their horses until such time as that is no longer required (or in the case of some yards, just to rent as stable/field/facilities).

They can express a personal opinion as to what or what they wouldnt have done IF they were in the horse owners position but they do NOT have the right to either override the owners decision nor should they put the owner in the position where a decision that they have the right to take means that the horse suffers. To me, making a horse move from the yard and be put down by the side of the road (if that is the case here) is unacceptable.

There is nothing cruel in PTS a horse - it is alive one minute, not the next, it does not ponder on the future. Given the vast numbers of healthy but unwanted horses in the country we should be concentrating on that issue.

It is nice if someone offered the horse a home but it remains the owners decision as to whether to take up that offer and until the second the horse hits the floor after PTS it is YO responsibility to ensure as little stress as possible for the horse during the process.
 
I seem to remember the OP said the horse did have some sort of condition that was causing a problem, whether it was causing it constant pain or not. It is an owner's right to make this decision and I was appalled to find a YO trying to make it more difficult than it undoubtedly already was. If it is going to be done I agree why prolong the ordeal by transporting to horse off the premises.

You say there was an alternative, was it a home for life, how could the owner guarantee that?

I thought the OP came on here and said the YO had changed their mind, so in my mind that was it, a momentary error in judgement and a change of heart - no damage to reputation really.

Unfortunately you've brought the subject up and I am horrified to hear of it happening at the side of a road??

If it was a perfectly happy, healthy horse that could have been sold to a loving home then I would think it was a real shame, but if I couldn't offer a home myself who would I be to criticise?
 
Blue2006 said:
We are all going to disagree over when it is prudent to put a horse to sleep. It is an extremely emotive topic however the deliberate and vitriolic defamation of character that went with this particular post was totally inappropriate.
Click to expand...

If you do indeed work for a (registered) charity, then I'm pretty sure they would not be impressed to find you wading into this with personal opinion.

Please state the defamation of character. As I doubt it would take much to prove that the horse was pts on the side of a public road - that alone would make me never touch the place with a bargepole and warn others away. Regardless of opinion on the horse being pts, the YO caused unecessary suffering by letting the horse be pts (which was happening anyway) at the side of a road, rather than in comfort in a field.
 
To the OP of this thread shame on you!!

The owner will currently be in bits about the destruction of her beloved animal and your on here slinging cr@p. Some charity worker. Charities PTS animals as they see fit as its sometimes better for the animals in the long run. There aren't unlts funds or spaces for any animals with many of them filled to bulging.

If the horse had issues and was dangerous then better PTS than another person or horse hurt. I considered it with my mare as I couldn't keep my two and if I hadn't found her a home before winter then she would have been PTS. My other horse went on loan and has come back and at the moment all is fine but if anything had to happen and I couldn't find him a loan home I would do best by him even though he is still healthy and rideable I would hate to see him hurt or abused or passed from piller to post due to his age.
 
Which charity do you work for OP, because if you say any of the reputable registered ones, then I have a strong inclination to disbelieve you work for them at all. No registered animal charity I know of which is worth their salt in any way disagrees with the use of humane euthanasia as a welfare tool, even when it comes to healthy animals being pts in order to control population and overcrowding issues.:confused:

And if it is one of those reputable charities, then I would search for a new career pronto OP, because you won't last two minutes if that upsets you! You clearly don't do any front line work with welfare issues do you? Do you not see some of the sights and situations that front line workers do? Because if you did, you may change your opinions somewhat.
 
Last edited:
How awful that the op felt it necessary to slate the person for having their horse Pts, its not an easy thing to do !! :eek:

The yard which the horse was at was a race yard which would lead you to think they would experience horses being Pts , not just a small yard in the countryside and it came to them as a shock.

The horses owner came on and said that the yo had agreed to have the horse Pts on their land later on , they didn't slate the yo simply said how distressing they found it, anyone would.

A for horses meeting the beva guidelines for distruction, when having my old horse Pts my vet advised me she didn't fall within the beva guidelines because she was "field sound". However knowing the horse something wasn't right and she wasn't happy.
 
wallykissmas said:
The horses owner came on and said that the yo had agreed to have the horse Pts on their land later on
Click to expand...

However when it came to walking her horse down to the field to be pts (and having talked to YO minutes before) the Horse Owner found the field to be padlocked and the horses life ultimately ended on the side of a public road.

The Horse Owner even asked that the yard not be attacked as were allowing her to pts on their land. The last thing the Owner needed at this time of difficulty was for it to be made difficult. The Yards behaviour was disgusting.
 
Must have missed the original thread. In a way I can see why a YO would not want to cause any other Client or Horse "unnecessary stress" BUT how about the stress of the Owner and horse being PTS. If it happened, as stated, by the side of the road this is disgusting. What harm would it have done to just have it done at the yard, even if the horse was moved to a field or paddock as close to the entrance to the yard as possible. I would be fuming if i was the Owner of this horse. They must be devastated already at losing their horse without all this kicking off. I do agree that if the OP works for a reputable charity they probably will not be happy that they are posting like this on here.
 
PandorasJar said:
However when it came to walking her horse down to the field to be pts (and having talked to YO minutes before) the Horse Owner found the field to be padlocked and the horses life ultimately ended on the side of a public road.

The Horse Owner even asked that the yard not be attacked as were allowing her to pts on their land. The last thing the Owner needed at this time of difficulty was for it to be made difficult. The Yards behaviour was disgusting.
Click to expand...

Just seen the bit about being told she could have it done on the yard and then the gate being padlocked. Absolutely shocking behaviour. I do not know who the yard is but I would hope (well I know) that if anything happened to my boy he could go on the yard.
 
TeamChaser said:
I don't know the background to this and my post probably seems like a hugely sweeping generalisation, maybe it is, but I get so pissed off with those that think it acceptable to treat a horse as a completely disposable posession. I would also far rather a horse is put to sleep than face an uncertain future but my preference would be for people to take some bloody responsibility for the horse they presumably bought when said horse was the love of their life and they were never, ever going to just get bored/tired of it!

Clearly I'm a complete fluffy bunny hugger, but mine are with me for life :D I may have to remind them just how lucky they are! I could not countenance having either of them put to sleep because I had no further use for them
Click to expand...

Mine are with me for life - or would sell if someone else would get more from them and give them more. However there are 3 who would be shot if circumstances changed, no matter who offered them a home. Two are older and one is a blind panicker (we know cause and she is now learning that not everything will kill her). They would never leave my or OHs possession in current state.
I wouldn't get rid of a horse simply because it wasn't rideable etc. but I wouldn't hesitate to pts if I thought their life wasn't of quality or that they were endangering other animals or humans. Sod what anyone elses opinion was.
 
Totally agree with everything Amymay has said.

The YO of the horse in question was out of order in my opinion. It is upto the owner to PTS, for whatever reason - it's not an easy thing to do.

If I remember correctly the horse wasn't happy and healthy, but even if he was, I'm sure the owner did the right thing for her and her horse.

It's so easy to pass a horse on, it takes guts and responsibility to face up to the truth.
 
PandorasJar said:
However when it came to walking her horse down to the field to be pts (and having talked to YO minutes before) the Horse Owner found the field to be padlocked and the horses life ultimately ended on the side of a public road.
Click to expand...

If this is true, what a shocking and disgusting piece of behaviour from the YO.

My thoughts go out to the horses owner- It must have been awful being met with the padlocked paddock moments before her horse being PTS. :(
 
Sam_1985 said:
Just seen the bit about being told she could have it done on the yard and then the gate being padlocked. Absolutely shocking behaviour. I do not know who the yard is but I would hope (well I know) that if anything happened to my boy he could go on the yard.
Click to expand...

Mine would always go on site and when OH ran a yard there was no question that any horse would go at home.
 
PandorasJar said:
However when it came to walking her horse down to the field to be pts (and having talked to YO minutes before) the Horse Owner found the field to be padlocked and the horses life ultimately ended on the side of a public road.

The Horse Owner even asked that the yard not be attacked as were allowing her to pts on their land. The last thing the Owner needed at this time of difficulty was for it to be made difficult. The Yards behaviour was disgusting.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely VILE, the land owner should be bloody ashamed, wish I could remember what race yard it was as I would be sending them and their clients am email explains what animal lovers they really are.

Op if you are the yo or know them I would point them to this thread, might make them think of their actions next time, the horse world is a very small place.
 
wallykissmas said:
That is absolutely VILE, the land owner should be bloody ashamed, wish I could remember what race yard it was as I would be sending them and their clients am email explains what animal lovers they really are.

Op if you are the yo or know them I would point them to this thread, might make them think of their actions next time, the horse world is a very small place.
Click to expand...

Oh i do remember seeing this. Saying it was a race yard reminded me as I googled the yard to have a gander.
 
I remember the previous threads and the yard involved. I thought it had ended as well as could be expected. Gutted to hear it did not. All the op on this one has done it to make us all aware of the yard owners even more shocking second change of mind. So sorry for the owner and shocked that a charity is supporting this. Name and shame the charity because I won't be supporting them
 
rockysmum said:
I remember the previous threads and the yard involved. I thought it had ended as well as could be expected. Gutted to hear it did not. All the op on this one has done it to make us all aware of the yard owners even more shocking second change of mind. So sorry for the owner and shocked that a charity is supporting this. Name and shame the charity because I won't be supporting them
Click to expand...

'If' there is a charity, and 'if' they support those views, then I doubt they are as 'large' as the OP makes out!
 
There really is no need for vindictiveness :confused: A brand new poster came here telling us her sorry story. After being named online another brand new poster comes on and tells us her version of the same sorry story. How some of you can all sit in full belief of either of them is quite beyond me and how some can be so spiteful is really beyond me! :o NONE of us know the real story so how about calling off the public lynching?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top