Scottish stud sell off...?

[Ponyplanet]

as stated to me by several persons who attended IN PERSON at the sale that the horses only stood without water from 10am to noon, well I am sorry but my horses go this long without water when transporting them or at a show & as yet to have one keel over.

I believe there are valid reasons which will come to light eventually as to why some horses did not have their original passports and therefore new passports had to be applied for to be able to get them in new homes.

 

[AmyMay]

[ QUOTE ]
without water when transporting them or at a show & as yet to have one keel over.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that we would all agree that what we may do in private, and what is done at a professionaly run and SSPCA monitored sales are two different things.

You may not offer your horse water for two hours when travelling. However, I expect it's the first thing you do when you arrive at your destination. As for being at a show all day - again, I would most certainly hope that your horse is offered water. But if you choose to withold it - that is your perogative.

You seem not to fully grasp the welfare issues that the management of this sale have raised.

 

[Ponyplanet]

well fill me in Sally, I get that it was a poor decision to cart old scared ponies to a Mart to sell off to raise money to pay off the depts, I get that Sally, I really do.. however as the vet in attendance was a top equine vet, as the decision to cart them to the mart was not made by the vet or I doupt the sspca then I am struggling to see why ppl are trying to call them into question?

 

[Cuffey]

[ QUOTE ]
well fill me in Sally, I get that it was a poor decision to cart old scared ponies to a Mart to sell off to raise money to pay off the depts, I get that Sally, I really do.. however as the vet in attendance was a top equine vet, as the decision to cart them to the mart was not made by the vet or I doupt the sspca then I am struggling to see why ppl are trying to call them into question?

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely the point is that no one took a stand, the vet, the SSPCA, the Animal Health Officer, and said NO to these elderly ponies and horses being sold in this manner. Without their co-operation the sale could not have gone ahead.

If The Shetland Pony Society can say and I quote from their rules for sales at mart
''ponies over 18years have to have vet cert and nothing over age 20 allowed at the sale''
Thainstone have regular SPS sales so would be well used to these guidelines

This is unlikely to be the last of this kind of sale in the current economic climate
Please let us learn lessons from this and make our opinions known to prevent more elderly horses and ponies having to go through this.

 

[LynneB]

I think you will find it was all day they were without water and not 2 hours

 

[jamesmead]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's also important to point out that the mart in question is very well versed in the running of auctions at which horses are sold. They have several rare breed (including horses and ponies) sales in the course of a year, and are also very heavily involved in the auction sales of cattle and sheep.

They will have been very sure to have conducted this sale in a professional manner and, I'm sure, will have met any legal requirements necessary to ensure that professionalism.

The mart are under no obligation to provide sustenance for any animal tendered for sale through them, unless those animals are held on mart premises for a day or more prior to the sale taking place.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I reiterate that I doubt the mart would wish to fall foul of the law regarding the sale of a horse without a passport, but that their only concern would be that any horse they sold should have a current passport pertaining to that animal.


[/ QUOTE ]

I too would expect a responsible and professional attitude from a mart for whom livestock sales are routine.

However, my representative's attempt simply to find out the mart's policy on animals being presented and known to have false or illegal documentation or on unfit animals being presented for sale, met with what seemed to be a lot of hot potato passing as soon as it was realised that this sale was the one of interest.

The livestock section couldn't say; as far as they were concerned it was all down to the SSPCA, but she could try calling someone in another department; but the person to whom the call was directed was not available until next week.

Another call produced another responsible person, who remained resolutely on other calls but passed on via his secretary that he didn't know the answers; he was only the organiser; he didn't do the livestock stuff. The seriousness of the passport issue and its wider significance was clearly described to the mart, but the overall impression was one of ducking any responsibility, despite an awareness that things were not as they should be.

I'm sorry but I do not think the mart can be held blameless. With its lack of clear guidelines and its present attitude, comprising a willingness to sell coupled with an apparent unwillingness to shoulder any responsibility for what is being sold, you have the perfect loophole for the passing on of unfit or stolen stock.

Lastly, re. the water; I believe the stock were transported to the sales venue THE PREVIOUS DAY. Can anyone confirm this? If so, and what AengusOg says is correct, would the mart be responsible for watering them? Were they, in fact, watered at all? Out of interest, who had provided the fodder and bedding?

One experienced buyer has confirmed that their new horse proved desperately thirsty when offered water; more than one could have expected. I would be interested to know whether others also found this. The trouble is, we don't know how long these horses went without; the duration of the sale may only have been part of it.

I think the post by Cuffey (?) suggesting that the real problem was a mass denial of responsibility really hits the mark. No doubt there was pressure by the finance company, based on purely financial considerations; yet vets, the SSPCA and an experienced livestock mart were involved and IMO allowed themselves to be the tools by which this sale was steamrollered through.

 

[snoopmummy]

The horses were indeed taken to the Mart the previous day and held in back pens as there was a cattle sale the previous day as well. A relative of mine was on the phone to the owners as the horses were being loaded at the farm, and she herself was very upset when she heard what could only be described as distressed horses in the background. I repeat again what I said in a previous post, that there was no water available for the horses from the time we arrived at 10a.m. till we left after 2p.m. Neither was there any sign that there had been any water in those pens prior to our arrival as there would have been signs of water on the floor.

 

[Cuffey]

Water

Jamesmead
I have it on good authority that the horses stayed overnight in a ''different building'' and were indeed hayed and watered and on good beds
So water was withdrawn during the sale only
My concerns with this practice (and it happens at many marts) is that horses are transported on without watering possibly for many hours and then may drink rather too much.
Up to point of sale hay and water are the responsibilty of the seller--bedding down to the mart

 

[jamesmead]

Cuffey, thanks for that. I am very relieved at that!

 

[no_no_nanette]

I am surprised that there currently seems to be a resounding silence from all those involved with this sale - are they all hoping that there will be a brief flurry of concern and then it will go away, do you think? That often seems to be the approach from DEFRA, for instance. Ciss is obviously pursuing the passport issues, which is great - but in terms of the lessons learnt on the welfare front, I wonder if anyone from the mart, SSPCA or DEFRA will ever bother to respond publically, let alone change their policy as a result of this experience?

 

[Ciss]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe there are valid reasons which will come to light eventually as to why some horses did not have their original passports and therefore new passports had to be applied for to be able to get them in new homes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Passport law makes it an offence to issue a second passport when an original one is known to exist, even if that passport is currently with the PIO for updating rather than in the possession of the keeper. This law is specifically in place in order to prevent duplicate passports being issued for horses offered for sale, as the original passports must provide full medication history for meat standards reasons (sorry to raise this aspect of the legislation but it is why the whole area of passports comes under the aegis of DEFRA). Any duplicate passport issued in haste before such a sale is not likely to have this information and will almost certainly not have had section X completed to indicate that they were not for human consumption as this would have limited the potential purchaser base (ie cut out the meat men) which I doubt the Receivers would have wanted.

The fact that a considerable number of the horses sold at the sale had catalogue entries citing valid UELNs issued by registered studbooks (including those issued by studbook PIOs abroad) proves that the animals concerned had valid passports and that if any others were issued -- especially if original microchips were found and a second still inserted -- they would be duplicates. Also presumably these original passports (or photocopies, valid documentation etc relating to them) must have been in the possession of the Tullynessle Stud (or whoever was acting as as the official keeper) up until the time the animals were removed from the farm as otherwise these UELNs and registration details could not have been included in the catalogue. So if any duplicates were issued they will have been issued after the catalogue was compiled and one does wonder where the originals have gone.

Furthermore, in the case of the animals with passports currently with a PIO for updating (even if abroad) it is possible that an offence could have taken place in even removing them from the farm in the first place, let alone in selling them with a duplicate passort, as legally no equine is not allowed to travel except when accompanied by its original passport.

IOW, if the situation is as described above there are therefor no 'valid reasons' for these illegal actions of issuing of a duplicate passport and knowingly transporting and selling a horse with an illegally issued duplcate passport took place or any way any meaningful justification can 'come to light eventually' to explain how ittook place within the law.

 

[greymare1]

Tovee, He has gone to an experienced home that will look after him well, indeed he looks different already. The dreadlock are gone, and he is now a little grey welsh pony again.
He is going to be used as a stallion, but also as a teaser, and he is certainly not a beginners pony,cute as he may look, he is all stallion!
I worked with him years ago when I was at the stud, one of many grooms that did not last.
Please be assured that he will be well looked after, and is not up for re-sale, sorry.

 

[Kilbricken]

Thankyou Ciss for putting the passport issue firmly back into the discussion.

Whilst I was/am very concerned about the welfare issues arising out of the day, it's the passport issue that I find most concerning.

I think passport issues like this and headlines in Horse and Hound about things like the TB with multiple MC are a wider concern for both horse owners (with and without passports) and wider ramifications for horses that do not have full medication history for meat if they can then have duplicate passports in order to circumvent existing drug history in a horse.

I'm rather concerned by this Defra lapse and the precedent it could set.

 

[brucea]

Thank you for your articulate reply Blanche...

[ QUOTE ]
"As far as has been possible in the circumstances."

[/ QUOTE ]

Means just that. In as far as it has been possible welfare of the horses has been top priority. SSPCA have been involved in a supervisory role all along - not just at the mart which is, by any measure, not a horse friendly environment

I know this gentleman - his kids sometimes ride my ponies - and he is non horsey, is very much aware of this - and has engaged the people who do know.

 

[brucea]

[ QUOTE ]
I do feel from reading the reports that there is another agenda going on (i AM speculating now) where people are using this situation to stir up either the backstory to the auction, professionalism of mart/vets/sspca agents and the passport issue for other ends.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes - I am sensing that too.

 

[jamesmead]

SMID, thankyou for answering the first part of my previous question, to confirm that your gentleman is non-horsey and that he was relying on the expertise of the SSPCA who were involved well in advance of the sale.

I went on to ask:

[ QUOTE ]
did the SSPCA offer him advice on the inappropriate nature of the sale? The shipment of the horse on box rest? The need to maintain the animals before the sale? The possible fate of the elderly ponies? If so, why did he not take it?

Would this gentleman also be the person responsible for the illegal passport fiasco?


[/ QUOTE ]

I do not feel that it is either helpful or necessary to look for ulterior motives in the response to the handling of this case. It is, quite simply, unacceptable in its own right. To say that the gentleman in charge of the sale is a nice chap whose kids ride your pony, is actually an irrelevance; the sale for which you suggest he was responsible was still badly mishandled, with instances of real disregard for welfare and serious disregard for the law.

I for one want to know what went wrong here. My "ulterior motive" is the protection of my own horses; I want to know that if they are stolen they are not illegally re-passported and passed on unquestioningly by people who are aware that things are not quite right, but are not prepared to stand up and say so. I want to know that if, God forbid, my horses ever fall into the receivers hands, they won't get the treatment that THESE horses got.

Unless we figure out how the system failed and how the parties involved were able to act as they did with no brake upon them, it WILL happen again.

I would say the character of the individuals concerned is actually irrelevant; it is how they functioned within the system that matters. Otherwise, how could a nice guy whose kids like ponies mastermind such an abomination of a sale?

 

[brucea]

I was at the sale jamesmead - were you??

It was no worse, and actually a lot better if the truth be told, than any other pony sale I have seen at the mart. In fact I have seen an awful lot worse, without the hew and outcry that this seems to have produced.

I am sory you have taken such heated exception to my coments about his character or that his kids sometimes ride my ponies - it was simply a comment and should have been taken at face value for what it was.

But you cannot blame the receiver for the mart environment, passport irregularities, or that the ponies themselves had to be disposed of in this manner. This is all a situation that he inherited, and has had to do the best with.

The elderly ponies, I understand, all went to good homes.

However, I wonder if the receiver should be perhaps informed of your intemperate accusations? I think I'll print this thread out and head up with it. It may be of considerable interest to him.

 

[AmyMay]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'll print this thread out and head up with it. It may be of considerable interest to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brilliant idea - or just point him in the direction of the forum. He may welcome the opportunity of attempting to address some of the concerns.

 

[Blanche]

SMID

My reply re " As much as was possible etc " was implying that it was a complete cop out . Welfare issues don't allow for someone doing what is possible for a receiver , the animal is either has his or her needs met or they don't . It appears that in this case they didn't . By sticking your head up your a*se and trying to make out everyone has no idea what they are doing doesn't help your case . If you have this receiver person at your elbow now ( or are indeed him) ask him whether he would stick a Picasso and Van Gogh that he had seized in a damp , leaking garage . I think not . They would be treated with the respect they deserve . So why not these animals ? I await , with baited breath , your reply !!

 

[brucea]

I assume that you were there..you haven't cleared that one up yet. Were you there Blanche or SallySmith? Who was actually there? Hm..let me guess...maybe neither of you?

Sally - this has been done now.

Blanche - the unfortunate way that you express yourself speaks far louder than any message you are trying to communicate.

I am not trying to make out that "everyone has no idea what they are doing" - just that those who inherited this situation were doing the best they could do, in the circumstances, which were less than ideal.

Enough is enough. Moderator please close this thread before there is a legal issue with the opinions being expressed and the allegations being made.

 

[pdiplock]

greymare1, thanks for the update on the Welsh Stallion. We are relieved to know he has found a good home. I would like to comment on the situation but given the threads thus far it is probably best not to. Suffice to say it would appear that all of the horses have gone to good homes where they will be looked after and tended to as they deserve! The fuss over the technicalities of the sale is missplaced in my view. I for one, from a position of knowledge and not conjecture, am very pleased that all of the horses in question have found new homes and do not have to suffer yet another winter without the necessary care and attention!

 

[Maesfen]

[ QUOTE ]

- just that those who inherited this situation were doing the best they could do, in the circumstances, which were less than ideal.

Enough is enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite right too IMO. Enough was enough and whoever was responsible for this sale going through as it did, has only themselves to blame for this discussion.

Everyone accepts marts are not the friendliest of places for any animal, that is without question. What is questioned is the decision to send these horses, particularly the elderly and infirm, away from the farm when the sale could just as easily - and with far less costs involved, be held at that premises. Whoever decided the mart it had to be obviously has no heart towards animals; the same job could have been done far more humanely than it was done, of that, there is no doubt. The good things as far as we are aware is that the horses seem to have gone to good homes for which we can only be thankful.

What the majority are up in arms about is the duplication of passports and micro chips which is against the law and gives us fellow horse owners little confidence in the future safety of our own animals because this duplication was done for convenience and who's to say it will not happen again with possibly a stolen horse, if this is allowed to to go unchallenged. Whoever was responsible for the duplications has set back the confidence of the general horse owning public that the laws of this land will be adhered to by everybody without fail and as such, they should be brought to book, whether that be the SSPCA, the vet involved or your friend himself. There was absolutely no excuse for that to happen and that is why people have been so cross because we all, to some extent feel threatened for the safety of our own horses knowing this was possible somehow, apparently with full co operation from the very authorities that are meant to uphold the law.

 

[Kilbricken]

[ QUOTE ]
What the majority are up in arms about is the duplication of passports and micro chips which is against the law and gives us fellow horse owners little confidence in the future safety of our own animals because this duplication was done for convenience and who's to say it will not happen again with possibly a stolen horse

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the crux of things for me (and thankyou for MFH09 for re-establishing it). I am really perplexed by those people who think this is a trivial issue or one that is being blown out of proportion. It's certainly going to make a mockery out of the point of NED or even tracking where horses are going in the food chain if it's simple enough to get a replacement passport and microchip.

Perhaps it's time for a freedom of information request to Defra on how many cases of duplicate microchipping have been found....it may unearth more of this issue going on than just the alledged events at this scottish sale.

Defra assured the general horse owning population that the above would not happen when passports were first introduced. And because of this many people gained faith in both passporting and NED...

 

[jamesmead]

SMID, I think you are misunderstanding me. I will deal with your comments in turn.

[ QUOTE ]
I was at the sale jamesmead - were you?? It was no worse, and actually a lot better if the truth be told, than any other pony sale I have seen at the mart. In fact I have seen an awful lot worse, without the hew and outcry that this seems to have produced.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was not at the sale; but this is irrelevant. The issues that I find most worrying (need I list them again?) are well documented; attending the sale would not alter my views on whether a horse should be unnecessarily transported with an injury or given an illegal passport. That you have seen worse than this and consider it acceptable IMO undermines the credibility both of the mart and of your own judgement.

What HAVE you seen, exactly?...





[ QUOTE ]
I am sory you have taken such heated exception to my coments about his character or that his kids sometimes ride my ponies - it was simply a comment and should have been taken at face value for what it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nowhere have I taken "heated exception" to your comments about this man's character; in fact I believe I accepted your judgement of his character, calling him a "nice guy"- but pointing out that this was irrelevant; his being a nice guy did not prevent the passport and welfare issues previously detailed. I reiterate; I am looking at this chiefly as a failure of systems and procedures; the faults need to be found and the systems and procedures need to be addressed.

[ QUOTE ]
But you cannot blame the receiver for the mart environment, passport irregularities, or that the ponies themselves had to be disposed of in this manner. This is all a situation that he inherited, and has had to do the best with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not blamed the receiver. Since YOU have credited him with responsibility for this sale, I have asked you to confirm, given the irregularities, whether the SSPCA whom you say he involved in the proceedings to deal with the welfare aspect, advised him appropriately or whether responsibility is truly his; and if so, why he chose the course he did. All fair questions, I think.

[ QUOTE ]
The elderly ponies, I understand, all went to good homes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Fortunately. However, I don't think the receiver was responsible for this.

[ QUOTE ]
However, I wonder if the receiver should be perhaps informed of your intemperate accusations? I think I'll print this thread out and head up with it. It may be of considerable interest to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Far from making any intemperate accusations, I have simply asked for information. You yourself detailed the receiver's position in this; I feel it needs further clarification.

The problems are real; something went very wrong here; so why? What happened?

As others have noted, I feel from the emotional tone of your post and your final threatening stance, that you know this man as a friend and are seeing him in this light; effectively that the hidden agenda is one of friendship and is your own. Please note that I do not know him, so have no axe to grind with the man as a person; I am more interested in his professional involvement here, as detailed by yourself.

 

[brucea]

[ QUOTE ]
As others have noted, I feel from the emotional tone of your post and your final threatening stance, that you know this man as a friend and are seeing him in this light; effectively that the hidden agenda is one of friendship and is your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all emotional about this, and I am not misunderstanding you - your posts and those of others (who also seem not to have been there) are perfectly clear.

However I know a bit more about the circumstances than you obviously do, and have the common sense and discretion not to sound off in a public forum in a way that is open to be interpreted as allegations of misconduct and potentially illegal activity.

I was also at the sale, which you were not, and saw the animals and the way they were handled first hand, which you did not - thank you for confirming that.

Also, comments made such as "should have been sold from the farm" do not take into consideration a) whether the farm has the required parking, public safety measures, insurance, facilities etc., for such a sale to take place, and that the horse that wa on box rest would have had to travel anyway when sold.

There were about 250 people in that auction room - not that many equestrian premises up here can park that number. Also it has rained up here for the last 5 weeks and much of the ground is waterlogged - which would have made parking in fields and lanes entirely unsuitable.

On the passports - yes, the system is lax, loose, open to misuse, not thought through, easy to manipulate and lots of other things. It's been like that since it was introduced. But in this case there were dicrepancies between the schedule and the horses reported ages, and there were passport issues.

But take a reality check please - there was compliance with the law as far as was possible, this is a liquidation and the receivers are not equesterian specialists, the mart is primarily for agricultural animals and probably the lead auctioneer (in common with many horse owners themselves!) may be unclear about the detail regulations surounding passports.

All that I have been trying to articulate, obviously badly since it's not being heard, is that there are many aspects of this whole situation that are less than ideal, and these were inherited by the team responsible for the sale. I know these people individually, and they were doing the best they could with what they had.

SSPCA are not equestrian specialists so passport issues would probably be lost on them, there was a equestrian vet in attendance - and this is generally not the case in regular horse and pony sales.

So - please step off your soapbox before you make further indiscrete accusations. A public forum like this is not the place to make allegations of misconduct!

P.S>

[ QUOTE ]
That you have seen worse than this and consider it acceptable

[/ QUOTE ]

Is entirely an entirely unnecessary and petulant comment - I have seen a lot worse than this, and in common with everyone else on this forum , I don't consider any mistreatment of, or illegal activity around, horses or any other animal "acceptable".

 

[magic104]

So - please step off your soapbox before you make further indiscrete accusations. A public forum like this is not the place to make allegations of misconduct! - OH so the reports of duplicate passports/MC's is untrue? If not then it is misconduct, surley because the law has been broken, reasons already highlighted.

P.S>


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That you have seen worse than this and consider it acceptable


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Is entirely an entirely unnecessary and petulant comment - I have seen a lot worse than this, and in common with everyone else on this forum , I don't consider any mistreatment of, or illegal activity around, horses or any other animal "acceptable". - So why is it wrong for people to question horses having no access to water for hours, or the selling of very aged animals? This has been confirmed by people who attended the sale & the catalogue which clearly stated two 30yo ponies. Just because there are/have been worse sales, this makes it alright, I dont think so. Moving forward ignorance will no longer be an excuse. If these receivers ever have to conduct a sale of animals like this again they will be better informed which can only be a benefit to the animals concerned.

If people took the attitude of SMID & swept things under the carpet (which for years took place) then the scandle of MPs’ expenses would have stayed hidden. Bringing issues out into the open can only be a good thing. If any of the observations made here on this thread are incorrect then they should be addressed by the appropriate bodies whether it be here on in an interview with an equestrian magazine. Though as it is public money that funds DEFRA it is in the general publics interest, so why confine to an equestrian magazine!. Whether the guy was santa claus is irrelavant. What is relavant is if the law was broken, why & how to stop it ever happening again. I along with 1000's of others have my horses passported & MC'd, I am going to be extreamly pissed off if someone could just take one of them & sell it because they have been able to obtain a passport with no questions asked. And there should be, because unless this animal is a foal, why are people trying to obtain original passports past the deadline?

"The Horse Passports (Scotland) Regulations 2005

Made 21st April 2005
Laid before the Scottish Parliament 22nd April 2005
Coming into force 16th May 2005"

Citation, application and commencement
1. - (1) These Regulations may be cited as the Horse Passports (Scotland) Regulations 2005 and shall come into force on 16th May 2005.

Interpretation
2. In these Regulations-

"horse" means a domestic animal of the equine or asinine species or a crossbreed of those species;

"keeper" means a person appointed by the owner to have day to day charge of the horse;

"local authority" means a council constituted under section 2 of the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994[2];

"passport" means-

(a) an identification document for a horse issued by a passport-issuing organisation containing all the information required by regulation 9(3) or 1(3); or

(b) in the case of such an identification document issued before the coming into force of these Regulations but which does not contain the pages in Section IX of the passport, that document with the Section IX pages attached in accordance with regulation 10,

"sell" includes any transfer of ownership, and "sale" shall be construed accordingly.
Organisations authorised to issue passports
3. The following organisations are authorised to issue passports (and any such organisation is referred to in these Regulations as a "passport issuing organisation")-

(a) organisations which maintain or establish stud-books for registered horses and which are recognised by the Scottish Ministers or by any other authority in the United Kingdom competent to recognise such organisations under regulation 3 of the Horses (Zootechnical Standards) Regulations 1992[3];

(b) organisations recognised in another part of the United Kingdom or another Member State under legislation which implements either-

(i) Commission Decision 92/353/EC (laying down the criteria for approval or recognition of organisations and associations which maintain or establish stud-books for registered equidae[4]); or

(ii) Commission Decision 2000/68/EC (amending Commission Decision 93/623/EEC and establishing the identification of equidae for breeding and production[5]); and

(c) international associations or organisations which manage or regulate horses for competition or racing and which are registered with the Scottish Ministers under regulation 4.

International associations or organisations
4. - (1) Any international association or organisation which intends to manage or regulate horses for competition or racing in Scotland shall register with the Scottish Ministers under these Regulations before it does so.

(2) Any international association or organisation which manages or regulates horses for competition or racing in Scotland and which immediately prior to the date of these Regulations coming into force was registered under article 4 of the Horse Passports Order 1997[6] shall be deemed to be registered for the purposes of paragraph (1).

(3) Any international association or organisation registered under an equivalent statutory provision in force in any part of the United Kingdom other than Scotland immediately prior to the date of these Regulations shall be deemed to be registered with the Scottish Ministers in terms of paragraph (1).

(4) The Scottish Ministers may refuse to register any international association or organisation which seeks registration under paragraph (1), or may withdraw registration from an international association or organisation registered or deemed to be registered under paragraph (2) or (3), and if the Scottish Ministers so refuse or withdraw registration the refusal or withdrawal, and the reasons for it, shall be given in writing.

Powers and duties of passport-issuing organisation
5. - (1) The passport-issuing organisation is "the competent authority" for the purposes of the passport.

(2) A passport-issuing organisation may cancel a passport issued by it if it is satisfied on reasonable grounds that-

(a) the provisions of these Regulations have not been or are not being complied with; or

(b) the owner has left the passport incomplete or it has been falsified in any way.

(3) When a passport is returned because a horse has died, the passport issuing organisation shall mark the passport accordingly but may then return it to the owner if permitted by its rules.

Records
6. - (1) A passport-issuing organisation shall maintain records of-

(a) information contained in applications for passports and for Section IX pages;

(b) any change of ownership of a horse; and

(c) the death of a horse.

(2) It shall keep these records until three years after the death of the horse.

(3) A passport-issuing organisation shall supply to the Scottish Ministers information from its records in such form and at such intervals as they may require by notice in writing.

Application for a passport
7. - (1) An application for a passport shall-

(a) be made by the owner of the horse;

(b) be made in writing to a passport-issuing organisation; and

(c) be in the format specified by that organisation.

(2) No person shall apply for more than one passport for a horse except-

(a) for a replacement passport in terms of regulation 16; or

(b) for another passport in terms of regulation 22.


Time limits for obtaining a passport
8. - (1) The owner of a horse which was born before 16th May 2005 who does not already have a passport for that horse shall apply for a passport for it before 16th June 2005.

(2) The owner of a horse born on or after 16th May 2005 shall obtain a passport for it on or before 31st December of the year of its birth, or by six months after its birth, whichever is the later.

Issue of a passport
9. - (1) On an application for a passport, and provided all its requirements are complied with, the passport-issuing organisation shall issue a passport.

(2) A passport issued in terms of paragraph (1) shall be completed, to such extent as may be required by these Regulations, in the format set out in Schedule 2.

(3) In the case of a horse either registered or eligible for entry in a stud-book of a registered organisation in accordance with Article 2(c) of Council Directive 90/426/EEC (on animal health conditions governing the movement and import from third countries of equidae[7]), the passport shall contain all the Sections specified in Part II of Schedule 1.

(4) In any other case the passport shall contain at least Sections I to IV and IX but may contain more Sections or all the Sections specified in Part II of Schedule 1.

Section IX pages for existing passports
10. - (1) In the case of a horse born before 16th May 2005 which already has an identification document issued by a passport-issuing organisation containing all the information required by regulation 9(3) or 9(4) except for the Section IX pages, a passport may consist of that identification document together with the Section IX pages obtained by the owner from a passport-issuing organisation, provided that the owner-

(a) applies for those Section IX pages before 16th June 2005; and

(b) attaches them to the identification document.


(2) Regulation 7 applies to an application for Section IX pages as it applies to an application for a passport.

(3) The Section IX pages issued by a passport-issuing organisation shall contain the same number or alphanumeric code as in Section II of the original identification document.

Identification
11. - (1) The passport-issuing organisation when issuing a passport shall identify the horse with a number or alphanumeric code not previously used by that organisation.

(2) It shall record the number or alphanumeric code in Section II of the passport.

Language of passports
12. - (1) All passports issued in Scotland shall be in English and French, except that Section IX may be in English only.

(2) A passport or any part of it may notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (1) incorporate a translation into such other language or languages as the organisation or association thinks fit.

Horses entering Scotland
13. - (1) The owner (or, in the case of an owner living outside Scotland, the keeper) of a horse brought into Scotland without a passport (or with a document which would be a passport but for the fact that it does not contain Section IX pages) shall apply for a passport or Section IX pages within 30 days of the horse being brought into Scotland.

(2) A horse brought into Scotland in terms of paragraph (1) must remain on the premises within Scotland onto which it has been brought until a passport has been issued for it.

(3) This regulation shall not apply in relation to a horse which remains in Scotland for less than 30 days.

Declaration concerning slaughter
14. Where a passport has been issued for a horse, the owner of the horse shall sign the declaration in Section IX of the passport concerning whether or not a horse is intended for slaughter for human consumption-



(a) if the horse was located in Scotland on the date when the passport was issued, before the first movement of the horse from the premises on which it was located as at that date;

(b) if the horse has been brought into Scotland on or after 16th May 2005 in terms of regulation 13, before the first movement of the horse from the premises within Scotland on which it is located on the date when the passport was issued (in which case the declaration must state that the horse is not intended for human consumption);

(c) before the horse is consigned for human consumption (in which case the declaration must state that the horse is intended for slaughter for human consumption); and

(d) before any veterinary medicinal product containing a substance specified in Annex IV to Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2377/90 (laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin[8]) is administered to a horse (in which case the declaration must state that the horse is not intended for human consumption).


Prohibitions
15.

(1) No person other than a passport issuing organisation acting in the course of its duties shall without lawful authority-

(a) destroy or deface a passport;

(b) alter any entry made in Section I of the passport;

(c) alter any of the details in Sections II or III of the passport unless authorised in writing to do so by a passport-issuing organisation;

(d) make an entry in Section IV of the passport except in accordance with the rules and regulations of a passport-issuing organisation, and no person shall alter any entry; or

(e) alter any details in Sections V, VI, VII, VIII or IX of the passport.

(2) No person shall without lawful authority possess a passport which that person knows to be false.

Replacement of a lost or damaged passport
16. - (1) Where a passport has been lost or damaged the owner of the horse shall apply for a replacement passport for that horse-

(a) where the passport-issuing organisation of issue is known to the owner, to that organisation; or

(b) where the passport-issuing organisation of issue is not known, to any passport-issuing organisation.

(2) Where the passport-issuing organisation applied to in accordance with paragraph (1) issues a replacement passport, it shall be marked with the word "Duplicate".

(3) Where a passport is damaged the owner shall send it with the application for a replacement to the appropriate passport-issuing organisation in terms of paragraph (1) and-

(a) if all the original information in the Section IX of the passport is legible the replacement passport shall repeat that information;

(b) if any information in Section IX of the passport is illegible the owner shall indicate in the replacement passport that the horse is not intended for slaughter for human consumption by completing Part II of that Section.

Restrictions on the movement of horses without passports
17. On or after 16th August 2005, no person shall move a horse-

(a) for the purposes of competition or breeding;

(b) out of Scotland;

(c) on to the premises of a new keeper; or

(d) for the purpose of receiving veterinary treatment,

unless the horse is accompanied by its passport.

 

[brucea]

OK - I've said my piece, trying to bring some balanced perceptions to the discussion.

I simply don't have time in my life to make 23000+ posts like SallySmith, and it's pointless engaging in any further discussion here where threads start sensible and just disolve into harangue.

 

[magic104]

You are on a hiding to nothing because you are coming across as trying to justify what took place. Most people do not have a problem with horse sales in general, that was not the issue. You have come across as defending these people who organised & arranged this sale, that is fine, except we are being told the law was broken, not acceptable. We are being told that very aged ponies were sold, again not really acceptable especially if these ponies were then deprived of water for hours. There are lessons to be learnt & these would only have come about because people stood up & made them known. Like it or not, people who should of questioned the proceedures of this sale, appear not to have done. If this was down to ignorance, as I stated before, this wont be the case in the future. I think this is a good thread which has bought to light many loop holes which need addressing.

 

[Cuffey]

Please note the 2005 legislation has been replaced by
The Horse Identification (Scotland) Regulations 2009

 

[Maesfen]

Thank you Magic; eloquently put.