wwyd dilemma

anyone know any grass livery in thurrock ? Even then I dnt know if that will be fair on her to live out 24/7 cold wet winter with arthritis and sweet itch in the summer. They would have to electric fence
 
cptrayes said:
Why not?

Why does a nice retirement for a horse take precedence, in your view, over a fulfilling life for the owner???
Click to expand...

Or that of a cow? Do you think dairy farmers have a moral obligation to plough their 'profits' into providing their cows with a retirement? (genuine question)
 
Parisexx said:
Cptrayes thats my point. Its not like I havnt given the horse a retirement. She has had two years x
Click to expand...

You have given this mare more then what many people would off you have let her enjoy her last few years pain free and that's something we can do for animals (not humans).
 
undergroundoli said:
Or that of a cow? Do you think dairy farmers have a moral obligation to plough their 'profits' into providing their cows with a retirement? (genuine question)
Click to expand...

Me? Of course not. I don't think this poster owes the horse any more, never mind any dairy farmer owing their cows a retirement.

For me, the quality of the life and a humane death are what matter entirely with farm animals, and with horses it has to depend on how the individual owner squares it with themself.

What I do wish people who keep their horses in a long retirement would realize is that they do it because it makes them feel good. That does not give them the right to try to impose their own values on people who it does not make feel good to pay out time and money to keep a retired horse.
 
undergroundoli said:
But as a milk drinker (sorry if you are not), you ARE responsible for dairy cows, YOU create the market that brings these animals into being.
Click to expand...

Okay, I very much like hazelnut milk or rice milk. So lets not have any cows except in projects to save them from extinction.

I think you're clutching at straws in desperation to justify the unjustifiable.
 
MerrySherryRider said:
Okay, I very much like hazelnut milk or rice milk. So lets not have any cows except in projects to save them from extinction.

I think you're clutching at straws in desperation to justify the unjustifiable.
Click to expand...


And I think you are being completely illogical. I think undergroundoli's argument is totally sound. Why is it unjustifiable to PTS a horse but dairy cows are fine? You haven't really answered why one offends and one doesn't. Just washed your hands of the cows completely...
 
cptrayes said:
Me? Of course not. I don't think this poster owes the horse any more, never mind any dairy farmer owing their cows a retirement.

For me, the quality of the life and a humane death are what matter entirely with farm animals, and with horses it has to depend on how the individual owner squares it with themself.

What I do wish people who keep their horses in a long retirement would realize is that they do it because it makes them feel good. That does not give them the right to try to impose their own values on people who it does not make feel good to pay out time and money to keep a retired horse.
Click to expand...

Should no pet owner have a moral obligation to care for their animal ? Would it be ok to have my 2 dogs put down before I go on holiday as it would be cheaper than paying for their care. I could get 2 new ones on my return. Until the next holiday.
Its doesn't make me feel good to pay out for them when I go away.

ETA. No one is imposes their values on the OP. She asked the question and I bet she wishes she hadn't. She does not find it as simple as some of you do and has some integrity.
 
Last edited:
Exactly right cptrayes. These people provide retirement because they feel good doing it. That's not the case for everyone. Since the animal has no idea of the alternatives to their situation, providing the end is humane its not about the animal. It's about the owner and what is best for them.
Sadly, the retirement option is not always the best for the horse, but that doesn't stop some people, because it is best for them.
As I said earlier, better pts too soon a few times than too late once.
 
MerrySherryRider said:
Should no pet owner have a moral obligation to care for their animal ? Would it be ok to have my 2 dogs put down before I go on holiday as it would be cheaper than paying for their care. I could get 2 new ones on my return. Until the next holiday.
Its doesn't make me feel good to pay out for them when I go away.
Click to expand...

My point entirely.

If it would make you feel worse to pay for them while you were on holiday than to have them shot, you'd have them shot.

But it wouldn't. It would make you feel foul. So you won't.
 
ribbons said:
Exactly right cptrayes. These people provide retirement because they feel good doing it.
Click to expand...
Whats wrong with that if the horse is content and looked after appropriately? Whats wrong about feeling good? Surely people buy a horse to feel good in the first place?
 
amandap said:
Whats wrong with that if the horse is content and looked after appropriately? Whats wrong about feeling good? Surely people buy a horse to feel good in the first place?
Click to expand...

Nowt wrong with it unless they feel the need to go round being offensive to people who don't agree with them. Which plenty of them seem to judging from this thread :p
 
Does anyone have any statistic of the amount of TB's that are PTS at the end of their working life aged about 3-4 years plus? In the past a horses working life was relatively short, not many lived into their teens, now its not unusual for a horse to live till they are twenty, which is great if they are doing the job they were bought for but not so good if you bought something to ride and you feel obligated to keep it till its 20+.
Basically most domesticated animals are bred because humans want them for a purpose, whether that to eat them, use them for work or they are companion animals. The animal has no concept of the future, in the horses case as long as there is food and sufficient water they would get along with out us, thinking they need us other than to provide the next snack is deluding ourselves. Somewhere in America they have studied a horses responses to cars used in training and they responded like they would to people.
I do not like horses kept in isolation in stables, this is acceptable to most people and I do not think that most people that do it are uncaring, just that's their management style though choice or circumstances. We make choices for animals all the time, just because its not what do you doesn't mean its wrong.
 
ribbons said:
Exactly right cptrayes. These people provide retirement because they feel good doing it. That's not the case for everyone. Since the animal has no idea of the alternatives to their situation, providing the end is humane its not about the animal. It's about the owner and what is best for them.
Sadly, the retirement option is not always the best for the horse, but that doesn't stop some people, because it is best for them.
As I said earlier, better pts too soon a few times than too late once.
Click to expand...

Any thing you do with an animal usually works out that is that is what is best for the human, whether it lives or dies.
 
Last edited:
MerrySherryRider said:
Should no pet owner have a moral obligation to care for their animal ? Would it be ok to have my 2 dogs put down before I go on holiday as it would be cheaper than paying for their care. I could get 2 new ones on my return. Until the next holiday.
Its doesn't make me feel good to pay out for them when I go away.
Click to expand...

I believe you have an obligation to ensure your dogs have shelter, food, exercise, company and medical attention, because dogs notice whether these needs are met. I believe that if you can no longer provide it you have a duty to ensure your dogs future, weather by re-homing or PTS.

I'd be very surprised if anyone put a dog to sleep for a holiday, but I think its better than abandoning them for a fortnight. I'm sure you don't enjoy paying for them while you are away, but I bet you enjoy coming home to them.

MerrySherryRider said:
Okay, I very much like hazelnut milk or rice milk. So lets not have any cows except in projects to save them from extinction.

I think you're clutching at straws in desperation to justify the unjustifiable.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with cows being killed off because they aren't economically viable. I am part of the market forces that bring this situation into being and I'm happy getting cheapy milk from Fresains and only having Guernseys in rare bread centres. I don't understand why you think horses deserve retirement but cows don't?

Parisexx said:
anyone know any grass livery in thurrock ? Even then I dnt know if that will be fair on her to live out 24/7 cold wet winter with arthritis and sweet itch in the summer. They would have to electric fence
Click to expand...

Sorry OP, can't help.
 
amandap said:
Whats wrong with that if the horse is content and looked after appropriately? Whats wrong about feeling good? Surely people buy a horse to feel good in the first place?
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with it provided the owner can afford to keep the horse, if struggling financially to do so considering another option should not make them feel guilty. At the end of the day it is a choice and having kept a horse in retirement for 2 years and now wishing to move on to a new stage of life the OP should not feel awful for considering pts.
 
honetpot said:
Basically most domesticated animals are bred because humans want them for a purpose, whether that to eat them, use them for work or they are companion animals. The animal has no concept of the future, in the horses case as long as there is food and sufficient water they would get along with out us, thinking they need us other than to provide the next snack is deluding ourselves
Click to expand...

So true, both parts.
 
At the end of the day, everyone must be comfortable with their own choices. I was uncomfortable with my choice to eat meat and now feel a lot more at peace with myself since I gave it up. But I there are loads more things I could do to be even more at peace with myself, but I choose not to because on balance I am very comfortable with where I personally draw the line, and it is not always logical! We are all human after all.

The OP asked the question 'What would YOU do?' and people should be able to answer that question without being slated for it. By asking WWYD? There is no right or wrong answer, just a load of opinions on what each person feels comfortable with. So all this logical reasoning is completely irrelevant as people are just saying what THEY would do.

We all have our morals and our values, and hopefully, most of us are comfortable with where we draw the line.
 
cptrayes said:
Who said there was anything wrong with it?
Click to expand...
Perhaps I misread the context? If I did then I see no point in the comment, we'd all rather feel good than bad surely if at all possible?

Be positive, I am not trying to make the op feel bad whatever she decides is up to her!
 
Last edited:
amandap said:
Perhaps I misread the context? If I did then I see no point in the comment, we'd all rather feel good than bad surely if at all possible?
Click to expand...


But that IS the point of the comment Amanda. It makes some people feel bad to keep a horse in retirement and have to spend large amounts of time and/or money on it.

Those people should, I believe not be looked down on if they choose to make themselves feel less bad by having the horse put to sleep. And likewise, it is not something to get sanctimonious about if keeping a horse alive makes the owner feel better.
 
cptrayes said:
But that IS the point of the comment Amanda. It makes some people feel bad to keep a horse in retirement and have to spend large amounts of time and/or money on it.

Those people should, I believe not be looked down on if they choose to make themselves feel less bad by having the horse put to sleep. And likewise, it is not something to get sanctimonious about if keeping a horse alive makes the owner feel better.
Click to expand...

Nail hit well & truly on the head.

All that matters is that the end (whenever it comes) is humane.

Owners should not be pressured either way unless the animal is at the stage where its welfare is compromised by keeping it alive.

One the decision is made & the deed is done by all mean grieve for your loss, but then move on. All this angst, weeping, wailing & guilt tripping is totally unnecessary IMO. Being able to deal with things in a practical manner doesn't detract from what the animal has meant to you over the years, it does mean that the chances are you'll make the right decision at the right time FOR BOTH OF YOU.
 
cptrayes said:
But that IS the point of the comment Amanda. It makes some people feel bad to keep a horse in retirement and have to spend large amounts of time and/or money on it.

Those people should, I believe not be looked down on if they choose to make themselves feel less bad by having the horse put to sleep. And likewise, it is not something to get sanctimonious about if keeping a horse alive makes the owner feel better.
Click to expand...

This this this. It doesn't mean you are a bad person if you don't give your horses a retirement, just that different things are a priority in your life. If you can and want to, great, if not you shouldn't be castigated for it.
 
cptrayes said:
But that IS the point of the comment Amanda. It makes some people feel bad to keep a horse in retirement and have to spend large amounts of time and/or money on it.
Click to expand...
Well, it doesn't make me feel bad to keep a non ridden horse for the same (or less) than a ridden one, so I missed that subtlety in the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top