RESPONSE TO URGENT HELP NEEDED

Well I'm afraid from the tone and desperation as well as the sentiment in the posts, I believe the first poster not this one.

You couldn't make this up :rolleyes:

From memory the horse had gone to the yard lame on box rest and there was nothing could be done so the owner let it have a few months doing nothing in the field then wanted to have it pts.

The owner of the horse said they wanted no more discussion or slagging off of the yard owners as well.
 
Last edited:
Spring Feather said:
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?
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
asommerville said:
i think OP came on after the original post to stick up for YO and say all was sorted? QUOTE]

This is my recollection too
ETA. I remember which yard it was too, largely because I ride past it regularly. I hadn't heard the last part of this story about the paddock being padlocked and that makes me feel sick at heart. I almost wish I'd been riding past that day so I could have offered the horse's owner my support and commiserations.
I agree that there are two side to every story but I did feel the owner's story had a genuine ring.
OP, I'd like to know which charity you represent too.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Spring Feather said:
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?
Click to expand...

Just because two people come on here starting threads doesn't mean people have to agree with both of them.:confused: It also doesn't mean, just because people are voicing their opinions, on an open forum, that people are being vindictive. It simply means they have an opinion on the subject!

What I do find vindictive, if it happened, was that the YO agreed in the end to allow the owner to use a paddock, and then left it locked.;)
 
moleskinsmum said:
asommerville said:
i think OP came on after the original post to stick up for YO and say all was sorted? QUOTE]

This is my recollection too
ETA. I remember which yard it was too, largely because I ride past it regularly. I hadn't heard the last part of this story about the paddock being padlocked and that makes me feel sick at heart. I almost wish I'd been riding past that day so I could have offered the horse's owner my support and commiserations.
I agree that there are two side to every story but I did feel the owner's story had a genuine ring.
OP, I'd like to know which charity you represent too.
Click to expand...

I know the yard too and I was quite surprised by the original post as it sounded quite out of character for a yard owner who has run the yard for many many years and no doubt there will have been many horses PTS over that time for various reasons. I did think on the initial post maybe we hadn't had the whole background story and maybe something was said / text in the heat of the moment. The last I heard was the YO had said she was ok to have the horse PTS but obviously I haven't seen the latest bit about the field being padlocked - why didn't someone ask for it to be unpadlocked? i am trying to think what field it must have been?

There is not room to have a horse PTS at the side of the road there and there are plenty of the yard's fields across from the yard and the gates aren't padlocked, they are usually wide open if there's no horses in. Personally, had it been me I would have just asked that the gate was unpadlocked or I would have taken to the horse to one of the other fields with no horses in, done it there and dealt with the YO after.
Click to expand...
 
Moomin1 said:
Just because two people come on here starting threads doesn't mean people have to agree with both of them.:confused: It also doesn't mean, just because people are voicing their opinions, on an open forum, that people are being vindictive. It simply means they have an opinion on the subject!
Click to expand...

You are mistaking me for an idiot. I'm not. And I'm obviously not talking about people having opinions. Do I honestly need to spell it out?
 
Spring Feather said:
You are mistaking me for an idiot. I'm not. And I'm obviously not talking about people having opinions. Do I honestly need to spell it out?
Click to expand...

Well I didn't actually think or imply you were an idiot, but if you say so...

You called posters vindictive for voicing an opinion against this OP, saying that if we don't know the full story we shouldn't judge. Fair enough, but on the other side of the coin, most people here are talking about OP's comments regarding their apparent none belief of healthy pts. If someone posts on here, they must expect opinions and criticisms to be given.
 
Surely no-one has ever made up or exaggerated a story on HHO?! :eek:

Like I said before, if someone is named then they have a right to give their side of things.

I can't find where it says the horse was put down on the roadside so if someone can provide a link please?
 
OP made one major boo boo.....he/she claims to work for a large equine charity (although when questioned goes remarkably silent!).
We all know that any charity worth its salt is saying the same as the rest right now. Good, sound useful horses are being given away as owners simply cannot afford the PTS cost.
This owner did the right thing by hers and forked out to have her animal destroyed rather than pass the problem onto someone else.
OP's initial claim and "opinions" along with his/her astounding silence would say to me that OP is as likely to work for an equine charity as Charles Manson is.
Given that.....I do not find the OP credible.
The owner of said horse had every right to have her beast PTS. It was not the YO's place to dictate or try and prevent by locking the paddock gate after an agreement had been reached.
 
rockysmum said:
I really object to people on here being called vindictive. They are giving their opinions, surely that is why the OP put the post on.

Having read parts of the OP I started to wonder if the OPs employer was actually one of the animal rights charities.

However it seems that even they recognise the need for euthanasia

http://www.peta.org/issues/companion-animals/euthanasia-the-compassionate-option.aspx
Click to expand...

I would be surprised if any member of such a charity would be involved with a racing yard at all though.
 
Blue2006 said:
fThis opens a can of worms as to why the horse in question was put to sleep but this does occur and will continue to do so until legislative reforms occur to protect the rights of horses and other sentient animals. I am also aware that the owner of this horse was offered an alternative solution where the horse in question would have been given a happy life. This was refused.
Click to expand...

Yes Moomin1, very surprised that this person is involved with a racing yard :confused::confused:

Considering the fate of many ex racehorses :(
 
ladyt25 said:
I know the yard too and I was quite surprised by the original post as it sounded quite out of character for a yard owner who has run the yard for many many years and no doubt there will have been many horses PTS over that time for various reasons. I did think on the initial post maybe we hadn't had the whole background story and maybe something was said / text in the heat of the moment. The last I heard was the YO had said she was ok to have the horse PTS but obviously I haven't seen the latest bit about the field being padlocked - why didn't someone ask for it to be unpadlocked? i am trying to think what field it must have been?

There is not room to have a horse PTS at the side of the road there and there are plenty of the yard's fields across from the yard and the gates aren't padlocked, they are usually wide open if there's no horses in. Personally, had it been me I would have just asked that the gate was unpadlocked or I would have taken to the horse to one of the other fields with no horses in, done it there and dealt with the YO after.
Click to expand...

It is interesting to hear that you were surprised at how the YO was being portrayed, especially as you actually know of the yard owner in real life. Maybe you could let her know that some people on here are vindictively planning to send her and her clients emails. Your story sounds the most plausible that this is out of character for this yard. As soon as I found out it was a racing yard I started to question the previous posters motives. Racing yards are well used to horses being PTS so for them to place obstacles in an owners way seemed very strange to me.
 
Blue2006 said:
I feel compelled to update the forum on the recent post regarding the euthanasia of a horse and the deliberate slander of a well respected and professional livery yard as well as the misrepresentation of circumstances. The horse in question has now sadly been put to sleep however the proprietors of this yard had been well within their legal rights to object to the horse being put to sleep in their field as the horse in question was not (according to BEVA guidelines) suffering, in pain or in any distress. This horse was happy, healthy and in the field with other horses. The objection was to prevent clients and horses unnecessary distress and as such feel the abuse that was directed from a misinformed public was outrageous. I work for a large horse charity and although welfare guidelines are a fuzzy area and all horse owners have the right to put their horse to sleep, it is very much at the discretion of the veterinary surgeon. Most vets however feel it is morally wrong to put a healthy horse to sleep if it is not considered dangerous. This opens a can of worms as to why the horse in question was put to sleep but this does occur and will continue to do so until legislative reforms occur to protect the rights of horses and other sentient animals. I am also aware that the owner of this horse was offered an alternative solution where the horse in question would have been given a happy life. This was refused.
Click to expand...

OMFG. I am so glad my YO is a farmer, non control freak and all round sensible dude. If I were the owner I'd have been tempted to lead the horse straight out in front of your gate and have it dropped there.

You'd better be a vegan OP.
 
Even if the OP works for a charity, that doesn't mean the OPs opinions are representative of the charity. It seems to me the OP mentioned working for a charity to make themselves seem more important and give their opinion more weight. I would be extremely cross if I was their employer. As for the nonsense about needing legislation to protect horses rights (I believe the OP meant the *right* to live, not the welfare rights which there is already legislation for), where are all these horses with a right to live supposed to go and who is supposed to pay for them? It's totally unrealistic.

I very much doubt the horses owner would have put to sleep a happy and healthy horse that they've been offered a suitable home for. Most people are not made of money and wouldn't insist on PTS, an option that will cost, purely to be nasty. The horses in these type of situations generally turn out to have a long term health problem, so not actually healthy and the animal only happy because the health problem is being adequately managed. If the owner of such a horse can no longer properly care for it then I don't think they're callous to PTS, because they certainly can't guarantee the standard of care once the horse has been passed on. It's a hard decision for anyone to make and I feel very sorry for the horses owner having to deal with unhelpful yard owners at such a time.
 
Spring Feather said:
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?
Click to expand...

Well said SF.
Sometimes the opinions expressed by the more excitable posters, are slightly embarrassing.
 
Actually with a little more thought I can think of a charity that might still take on horses.

I passed it last year, tangled barbed wire fencing, ragwort, oldies like skin and bone. I have also heard they offer visitors riding lessons :eek:.

I wouldn't let mine visit the place, never mind end up there because I didn't have the courage to PTS if necessary.
 
Sugar_and_Spice said:
Even if the OP works for a charity, that doesn't mean the OPs opinions are representative of the charity. It seems to me the OP mentioned working for a charity to make themselves seem more important and give their opinion more weight. I would be extremely cross if I was their employer.
Click to expand...


This is probably true. I got told by someone who really does work for a big horse charity that I was cruel to my horse because I moaned about him on facebook and that he'd better off being rescued.

Something tells me if a field officer had come out to visit said horse they would not have considered him a welfare case in need of rescuing :rolleyes: I very nearly wrote to them to ask them if they approved of the comments made but then decided it wasn't worth the hassle...
 
Spring Feather said:
It is interesting to hear that you were surprised at how the YO was being portrayed, especially as you actually know of the yard owner in real life. Maybe you could let her know that some people on here are vindictively planning to send her and her clients emails. Your story sounds the most plausible that this is out of character for this yard. As soon as I found out it was a racing yard I started to question the previous posters motives. Racing yards are well used to horses being PTS so for them to place obstacles in an owners way seemed very strange to me.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify they are not a big racing yard but she does have some racehorses to train there on a small scale. There is another racing yard they are neighbours with too who own a lot of the surrounding land and some more gallops. I do not know the YO as in she's not my friend but I had a few lessons with her when I was younger and we used to attend shows and xc events at that yard. They have A LOT of land there and hence why I could not understand why she would be so objectionable to a horse being PTS as it's not something that is likely to shock her!

However, as I'd said I imagine there was a bit more of a back story to it all and I do not see why it matters now as the horse has been PTS, the horse would have had no idea what the issues were and the original poster wasn't a long-term livery there. For all we know one of the other liveries may have not liked the idea and hence why there was the issue originally.

I think it is madness for people to threaten to write letters to the YO or clients, that's ridiculous! None of the people know the full story and most do not know the yard in question (I guess i don't either other with regards the yard politics - although they do need to sort their indoor school out but hey ho!! :) )

I think people just need to let sleeping dogs lie and I don't know why this post was started really, just to bring up the subject again.
 
rockysmum said:
She cant remember the yard, and I haven't told her :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
"She" can remember the yard and no I wasn't told .... It's called computer history !
Spring Feather said:
Right.
Click to expand...

Right.

ladyt25 said:
Just to clarify they are not a big racing yard but she does have some racehorses to train there on a small scale. There is another racing yard they are neighbours with too who own a lot of the surrounding land and some more gallops. I do not know the YO as in she's not my friend but I had a few lessons with her when I was younger and we used to attend shows and xc events at that yard. They have A LOT of land there and hence why I could not understand why she would be so objectionable to a horse being PTS as it's not something that is likely to shock her!

However, as I'd said I imagine there was a bit more of a back story to it all and I do not see why it matters now as the horse has been PTS, the horse would have had no idea what the issues were and the original poster wasn't a long-term livery there. For all we know one of the other liveries may have not liked the idea and hence why there was the issue originally.

I think it is madness for people to threaten to write letters to the YO or clients, that's ridiculous! None of the people know the full story and most do not know the yard in question (I guess i don't either other with regards the yard politics - although they do need to sort their indoor school out but hey ho!! :) )

I think people just need to let sleeping dogs lie and I don't know why this post was started really, just to bring up the subject again.
Click to expand...

I agree the subject shouldn't have be brought up but the op clearly had an issue with the original poster hense they thought it was a good idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top