SPCA seizes 12 horses, owner's defense video [Archive]

MistyBlue

Mar. 10, 2009, 07:04 PM

Quotes from the owner on other BBs...BBs about Living Free or Dying and NH Underground. Sounds like an anti-social wacko trying to start his own survivalist compound:
Horses have been finding their own shelter for tens of thousands of years. They don't need nosy bureaucrats to protect them.
(where do they find shelter in tiny panel corrals?)
Today he comes out with the intention to take our most valuable horses. Did we pay him $226 so he could scope out the population and pick out the best ones? Or is it just a coincidence that the SPCA chooses the vet that we just hired? Either way, Dr. George needs to know that he is not doing this for the safety of animals, but for the pleasure of a Napoleonic investigator for the SPCA.
(yup, all a conspiracy to take their valuable horses. because the SPCA isn't currently overrun with rescues and needs more horses.)

Not to mention he moved to NH recently to become a Free Stater. Meaning he moved there to try to form a pseudo-community that doesn't have to listen to the "gubmint" and so he can carry a gun anywhere, anytime for any reason. Also believes that the government should not bother people breaking any laws if those broken laws aren't bothering anyone else...such as neglecting your horses. None of the "gubmint's" business if he decides to not care for his animals and so they moved to NH and joined Free State Project...the aim of which is to get members from all over the country to leave their states and move en masse to NH so they can have 20,000 members hoping it's enough to crash the government there and set it up as their own full state anti-government survivalist compound:
Upon reaching 5,000 commitments, the Free State Project conducted a vote to select the destination state from a field of ten candidates. On October 1, 2003 we announced that our participants had chosen New Hampshire as the future Free State. New Hampshire’s small population factored heavily in the selection process. Our research showed that 20,000 activists can heavily influence states, like New Hampshire, with populations of less than 1.5 million and our early movers report that even a few hundred can make a significant difference. With its existing distaste for big government and a welcoming attitude for the Free State Project’s goals, New Hampshire is an attractive destination.

Yeah....okay. Nutters. No wonder the cops made sure they were unarmed and visible during the seizure. :rolleyes:

Rancher

Mar. 10, 2009, 07:31 PM

I actually saw this video this morning. It was posted on another board.

If those were MY horses being taken away for 'no reason' I would make SURE and film adequate hay, water, shelter and condition of the horses. The fact that we never really SEE the horses makes me wonder. Not a very convincing video. It looks very shady to me on the part of the owners.

They keep showing how the trucks had their plates blocked out and farm names blocked out. I am guessing they had to borrow a truck and trailer from someone. Not all rescue organizations have their own horse transportation. If an SPCA wanted to borrow my trailer with my farm name on it to confiscate some horses I would want my name blocked out too, regardless of what I thought of the seizure. Makes perfect sense to me.

To me these people are clearly hiding something. I kept waiting to see the horses being loaded up and it never happened.

I had to laugh at the start where it says that they were 'disarmed' and sent out of the house! Ya! Of course you were! Do you think they feel like getting shot?? People can take drastic measures when they feel like they are being violated.

Whatever. If they didn't do anything wrong then they will get them back. You really CAN'T take horses for no reason.

Queen Latisha

Mar. 10, 2009, 07:47 PM

Unable to see the horses and what condition they're in, makes me wonder.
If someone was taking my horses, due to false negligence charges, the horses would be in the forefront of the video.
The fact that we see one horse, under a blanket does nothing for the owner's defense.
If the allegations are false, let's see the horses.:mad:

JSwan

Mar. 10, 2009, 07:50 PM

Mistyblue -

The only words I can come up with are..... "Oh my."

<3OTTB

Mar. 10, 2009, 08:16 PM

http://discus.equinesite.net/discus/messages/5/19055.html?1236729719

:no:

I checked out the link to there forum. These people think it's OK to not provide shelter to horses? I plan on joining and commenting on that. Looks like people are just jumping on the bandwagon and not paying attention to the welfare issue.

Anyone else notice all the junk all over? And that pen with the blanketed horse doesn't look to safe to me.

They also disable the comment section of their defense video. Hmmm?

MistyBlue

Mar. 10, 2009, 09:14 PM

I belong to that BB...had to comment. The folks involved don't care about the horses one bit. They care about being Free Staters and getting any and all negative attention they can. They only convince the ignorant online anyways. But expect to see the other Free Staters running from BB to BB to defend their members...without any knowledge whatsoever. :no:

spacehorse

Mar. 11, 2009, 11:58 AM

My cuckoo radar is in overdrive after watching the youtube video....:eek:

Barnfairy

Mar. 11, 2009, 12:03 PM

I couldn't help but notice while watching their pathetic youtube video that they took exception to being forced outside on a snowy day for two hours.

Hey, F-tards, your horses are stuck outside in the weather *every* day with no protection from the elements!

BuddyRoo

Mar. 11, 2009, 12:07 PM

This whole "Free Stater" thing is a little cultish and odd to me.

I fail to see what it has to do with the welfare of horses...other than being a tool for attention. Kind of like those white supremecist parents who named their kids Hitler and other such things....then the bakery wouldn't put the kid's name (Hitler) on the birthday cake and voila! Attention. (kids were removed from that home)

Anyway...I sort of get the feeling the guy is a whack job and the woman (whose horses they are) is along for the ride?

Regardless...stupid should hurt. Toot! Toot! Clue Train is pulling away from the station....

I would love to see some actual documentation on the horses' condition.

Barnfairy

Mar. 11, 2009, 12:15 PM

I would love to see some actual documentation on the horses' condition.Which is exactly what any normal camera-wielding owner would have done on seizure day --if in fact the horses were being taken wrongly-- instead of badgering the officials who demonstrated saintly restraint while acting in the horses' best interest.

Rancher

Mar. 11, 2009, 12:23 PM

Which is exactly what any normal camera-wielding owner would have done on seizure day --if in fact the horses were being taken wrongly-- instead of badgering the officials who demonstrated saintly restraint while acting in the horses' best interest.

These are the mans own words in regards to that (I pulled them off the comments to the video).

As far as no pictures of the horses, my concern was with the process. I don't see this action as having as much to do with horses as it has to do with the role of government and private property.

If the government can make rules about your private property, and then take your property away when you break their rules, do you really own that thing?

He clearly doesn't get it.

BuddyRoo

Mar. 11, 2009, 12:27 PM

normal camera-wielding owner

Yeah...methinks that's not what we're dealing with here. :lol:

But in almost every serious case of neglect/abuse I've been involved with, the owner/caretaker seems more concerned about "my rights!" and "my property!" than the welfare of the animals. If they had been thinking about the welfare of the animals at any point along the way, they wouldn't have to be worrying about their rights or their property.

Any pictures they DO produce are usually ones taken the day an animal arrived into their care. After that, pictures are proof of a problem and therefore, they don't exist.

I've actually had people send pics saying "See how good the horse looks?" And it's a pic from the sale ad when they BOUGHT the horse...5 years ago or whatever.

Ack.

Whomever mentioned on the first page that folks like this aren't going to get much sympathy on a board like this full of folks who spend their time in the trenches was right.

I certainly wouldn't go round up the lynch mob w/o more information, but I find it very very hard to believe that the ASPCA did this for any other reason than there was really a problem. At least in my experience, it's harder than heck to get the law involved until there's a serious serious problem and even then, it's tough sledding to get animals removed.

gloriginger

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:21 PM

Here is more information:

http://www.forumhome.org/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=Default&mad=No&sdetail=7791&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1276&hn=forumhome&he=.org

also very noteworthy is that this "situation" had started in Colorado prior to them moving to NH here is the information:

"IV. Information Updates –
Jones Ranch Conservation Easement - Mr. Sprunk said the owners of Jones
Ranch property are violating their conservation easement by grazing 26 horses on
the property. Animal control officers recently posted the property and threatened
to start removing horses that were malnourished. The owner of the property has
left the state and the house is in foreclosure. Mr. Sprunk said he will try to
3
contact the Animal Welfare Officer next week to see if there was any new
information. The landowner is supposedly trying to find new homes for the
horses.
Mrs. Matthews said steps are being taken so that a title search will reveal the
conservation easement violation and make the property difficult to sell. The
County Attorney’s office will be responsible for this process. The asking price
for the property is $650,000.
Mr. Sprunk said the recent rains have at least helped the appearance of the land,
he expects the property will recover if the horses are removed.
Mrs. Matthews said a lender cannot be held liable for the violation of the
conservation easement since they were not a signatory to the easement.
Mr. Sprunk has never actually spoken with or met the owner, Heidi Fredrick. Mr.
Weston asked if we could have the Sheriff’s Office serve the letter to the owner.
Mr. Sprunk wondered how this could be accomplished if the owner is out of state.
He expects the realtor may be of some help, he must be concerned about the status
of this property.
Mr. Welle asked what the goal is at this point. Mr. Sprunk said the primary goal
is to get the horses off the property and that is happening, largely because they are bening neglected."

Source: DOUGLAS COUNTY OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PUBLIC MEETING
Philip S. Miller Building
100 Third Street
Castle Rock
September 4, 2008
6:00 PM

MistyBlue

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:30 PM

On March 9, members of the Candia Police Force, along with two veterinarians and members of the New Hampshire SPCA, used a search warrant to examine approximately 25 horses at the home of Brian Travis and Heidi Fredrick in Candia. Of those horses examined, twelve were taken from the property, six for medical reasons and because they were emaciated, and an additional six because there was not proper shelter available.
According to sources involved, Steve Sprowl of the NH SPCA warned the landowners this past November that shelter had to be provided for the animals or they would be seized. At that time police had come to the property at Sprowl’s request to investigate a tip that the horses did not have adequate shelter.*
The two veterinarians, from TNT Equine in Dover and Deerfield Veterinary Services in Deerfield, were called in by the SPCA to verify there was a medical reason to take the horses. Neither of the veterinarians had contacted the SPCA. A spokesperson for the Deerfield veterinarian said they were there to see that “the animals’ best interests were first and foremost.”
In addition to the perceived lack of shelter, some required documentation was not made available when requested. While many people do not keep copies of the Health Certificate required to take an animal across state lines, a Coggins Certificate for each animal should be available. This is an official United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) document that shows a horse has been tested for Equine Infectious Anemia [EIA] and has a negative result. This is an extremely infectious disease. Horses testing positive are euthanized and other animals with which they come in contact are quarantined.

Nice...goes right along with them leaving a bunch of horses behind when they moved out of CO...left on the property without anyone caring for them and now the Realtor and town are stuck with their left over unfed abandoned horses.

Not to mention that the Free Staters are urging people to NOT donate to the SPCA to help care for their horses.
AND...the same underground website is now trying to ferret out where the horses are for the owners. Hoping a bunch of play acting morons don't go trotting off toting guns to this poor horse owner's house:
"I saw a horse on a property last night on the way home in which I can't say I recall ever seeing a horse or a trailer on it. I wonder if it is one of Heidi's? It's this house for sale on Black Brook Road in Goffstown. Someh what near Manchester."

danceronice

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:34 PM

Free State is not a cult. It's related to/an offshoot of the Libertarian Party, or at least those members who finally realized that the only way they would ever start winning major elections is if they got as many Libertarians as possilbe to move to one state. The point was to get active in politics. The problem is Libertarianism is sort of inherently disorganized and tends to attract people who are not that great at organizing political action. Which is a shame as the basic philosophy of Libertarianism is a good philosophy, and also the only party where you're likely to have a gay atheist marijuana grower at the meeting with the gun-toting fundamentalist Jesus freak* and both voting for the same candidate.

And it sounds like the biggest problemis a conservation easement violation.

Did the SPCA post any pictures, since the owners' videos skills are...questionable?

*Stereotypical descriptions for hyperbolic/comic relief purposes only. Not intended to portray any actual person, living or dead. In particular no offense is meant to gay atheist fundamentalists or gun-toting Jesus freak marijuana growers.

BuddyRoo

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:39 PM

In particular no offense is meant to gay atheist fundamentalists or gun-toting Jesus freak marijuana growers.

SNORK! :lol:

gloriginger

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:47 PM

Does anyone else see the humor in naming your "underground" website NHUnderground?

Isn't that like making you password "PASSWORD"

BuddyRoo

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:48 PM

Funnier that when I saw NHUnderground I thought it was a Parelli group.

gloriginger

Mar. 11, 2009, 01:50 PM

oh no! That's the last thing this situation need in the mix, a bunch of Parellites!

I am seriously considering moving out of New Hampshire. I knew the state was weird, but I had no idea it was being invaded...

seeuatx

Mar. 11, 2009, 02:02 PM

*backs sloooowly away from the Libertarian party*. Sad thing is that I tend to like libertarianism and the whole concept of not having the guvmint regulating what we should be taking personal responsibility for. Apparently that concept of personal responsibility is lost of fruitbats like this... and ultimately lead the Libertarian party down the drain. Unfortunately it also brings up philosophy questions about Leviathan vs. General Will that frankly make my head hurt...

meaty ogre

Mar. 11, 2009, 02:10 PM

I am seriously considering moving out of New Hampshire. I knew the state was weird, but I had no idea it was being invaded...

Your state is wierd. :) (No offense meant to NH-dwellers, but anti-kindergarten? Seriously?!) Get out while the gettin's good I say! I suggest somewhere warm!
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jyivqcf2Si_ejoNpt0EHmlqubRfAD96RU8G80

seeuatx

Mar. 11, 2009, 02:24 PM

Your state is wierd. :) (No offense meant to NH-dwellers, but anti-kindergarten? Seriously?!) Get out while the gettin's good I say! I suggest somewhere warm!
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jyivqcf2Si_ejoNpt0EHmlqubRfAD96RU8G80

Sad thing is when all those "guvmint" employees leave for new states because pay sucks (no taxes to pay salaries), it's the loonies that are ruining it all that will be complaining the loudest. No teachers for the kids, no snow plows for the roads, and no police to call when the real crazies start looting.

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 11, 2009, 02:32 PM

Although in my opinion, a well rugged up horse doesn't really need a "building" shelter, this video needs to show condition of the horses if they want sympathy. They spent a lot of time videoing the people and trailers. They should have videoed each horse close up as it was being examined. I would also request a written statement from the vet about a description of each horse they were loading. They should have also quickly called another vet or two & several other nearby professionals to document condition.

I have heard of some really shady rescues recently, but this one does not show any proof of the condition of the horses.

So AC was concerned about no shelter in November, and waited until March 9th, at the end of the winter to do anything about it? Sounds like both parties are not caring about the horses.

goeslikestink

Mar. 11, 2009, 02:33 PM

I know that there are always 2 sides to every story...BUT I didn't see anything horrible... The clip was really fuzzy but it looked like the horses weren't underweight and even had blankets on?

thats why they had blankets on dont be fooled by what you see more of what you didnt see
no resuce would seize horses or ponies if animals werent neglected
and obvious reason they cant say on tv as to what or who they are as some work undercover
and wouldnt want to commmit themselves before being presented in a court of law
they have also taken pics of everything beofre being loaded without the rugs obviously you didnt see that as film more than likely been edited so you all belvie hes a good guy and girl

if that was the case the horses wouldnt have been taken

as for guns- they wouldnt have come in force and presented force unless in a forceful situation the woman is in denail and might have used force to keep her horses as she was screaming at the end
and you dont know all the fact as you or i werent there

<3OTTB

Mar. 11, 2009, 05:23 PM

I have to say I know a good amount of Freestaters. I am not a libertarian but I am a Republican who boarders on Libertarianism, sometimes. The ones I have meet are nice, well educated, working productive citizens who are very active in politics. The last example that comes to mind is of when NH attempted to pass a horse licensing law. The Freestaters helped to make sure that law didn't pass. Some of these people I know very well and they are my friends. They are not weirdos by any means just because they do not believe in what the average person does. It is a free country afterall.

****However***** I cannot fathom why they would offer support on this issue. Cripes, Heidi is WHY laws HAVE to be passed - because people are too stupid and suck! It's really making them look bad. The freestating friends of mine are NOT helping Heidi or even commenting for that matter. The whole deflection is a shame. This case is an onion and we'll all see what lies in the middle as the layers are peeled away little by little.

I think people should call the NHSPCA and offer them support. Plus these 12 horses probably need money. I am donating to these horses.

Steve Sprowl
Office: 603-772-2921 ext. 111

I have heard that freestaters are bombarding the phone lines and plan to demonstrate. They (heidi) are urging people not to give $ which I find odd because $ is needed to care for seized horses. Don't they want them cared for?

If you don't donate or speak up now please do so as more details come to light.

<3OTTB

Mar. 11, 2009, 07:56 PM

I found another youtube video. I guess this "betapagal" is Heidi?? And here's her uhm ? guilty of child endagerment?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYVpuW2_Epk

YIKES.

ETA: this was tagged with the SPCA raid, also posted by betpagal as well.

gloriginger

Mar. 11, 2009, 08:01 PM

I found another youtube video. I guess this "betapagal" is Heidi?? And here's her uhm ? guilty of child endagerment?

yeah no kidding, look at the rope on the ground- especially in part 2- the horse almost steps on it a few times, horse looks like a very sweet cute horse that is trying to be good, but yeah...YIKES is right.

Kementari

Mar. 11, 2009, 08:57 PM

Well, we do know that the volunteers took very good care of their horse trailers. :lol: (I'd cover my license plates, too, if I were going to rescue horses from people that unstable. Just because you know you are doing the right thing doesn't mean you are willing to be hunted down and harassed at your home for it.)

Count me in with the "If they were innocent, they'd be showing the condition of the HORSES" crowd. And, truly, keeping horses without shelter - even with blankets - in the winter in NH IS wrong. I was THIRTY DEGREES BELOW ZERO here in January - WITHOUT the wind chill. :eek: Blankets aren't enough, except maybe for a Thelwell pony. (And, for the record, my horse lives out 24/7 - but with shelter.)

The fence looks cobbled together, but I wouldn't pass judgment without actually being able to, you know, SEE the thing. Sometimes you have to cobble together a fence for a bit, and it can be done safely.

I should've guessed they were Free Staters. Those people are whacko. (But for those thinking of moving away, don't worry: they haven't even managed to get 700 of them to move here yet, despite declaring originally there'd be 20,000 by, what was it, 2010? :lol:) The very idea of libertarians moving all to one place so they can influence the politics seems to me to be inherently UN-libertarian.

Oh, and I've used Dr. George (while he was with Wadleigh Falls), and he's not the type to go scouting people's farms for expensive horses to seize. :rolleyes: He's down-to-earth, a good vet, and a nice guy who has the animals' best interests at heart. I'm happy to see he has his own practice now, and I hope these jerks don't screw up his business just because he had the guts to try to help some horses.

sketcher

Mar. 11, 2009, 09:07 PM

Sad thing is when all those "guvmint" employees leave for new states because pay sucks (no taxes to pay salaries), it's the loonies that are ruining it all that will be complaining the loudest. No teachers for the kids, no snow plows for the roads, and no police to call when the real crazies start looting.

I've got to say one thing about NH. It appears that they have one of the lowest % budget gaps and one of the snmallest sized gap in actual dollars in the whole country - so the things we make fun of are the things NH is willing to give up to live within their means? Is it true?

http://www.cbpp.org/9-8-08sfp.htm

equinelaw

Mar. 11, 2009, 09:11 PM

yeah no kidding, look at the rope on the ground- especially in part 2- the horse almost steps on it a few times, horse looks like a very sweet cute horse that is trying to be good, but yeah...YIKES is right.

I thiiiiiiinnnnnnnkkk he might be a stallion. I can't see under there. but he acts like one and its a common marketing ploy to use small children to show how nice your should be a gelding stallion is.

MistyBlue

Mar. 11, 2009, 09:36 PM

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 11, 2009, 09:38 PM

THIRTY DEGREES BELOW ZERO here in January - WITHOUT the wind chill. :eek:

IMO, that is no weather for horses even WITH a shelter. :eek: :lol: :dead: There is a reason I live in Virginia. :cool:

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 11, 2009, 09:40 PM

Looks like that last video was removed. Do we have a lurker?

quietann

Mar. 11, 2009, 10:06 PM

I've got to say one thing about NH. It appears that they have one of the lowest % budget gaps and one of the snmallest sized gap in actual dollars in the whole country - so the things we make fun of are the things NH is willing to give up to live within their means? Is it true?

http://www.cbpp.org/9-8-08sfp.htm

It doesn't look so good for NH in Table 3.

yes, they live within their means, at least partially by driving their most vulnerable citizens to move to other states (e.g. MA... the case I am most familiar with was a young woman with a head injury from a car accident. NH gave her a small housing voucher and foodstamps, no healthcare, no rehab, and took away the voucher when she got a minimum wage 10 hour per week job -- which she lost within a few weeks because she was mentally incapable of holding a job. After that she was evicted because she didn't have the voucher anymore. Her NH social worker told her to move to MA, where she lived out the "residency period" by moving around to various homeless shelters, and eventually got state-covered healthcare and rehab services -- with her doctors saying she could have made a full recovery if she had not had the 6 month delay from the time of her car accident until she finally got care...)

The "live free or die" mentality works great... until you really need something you can't get on your own.

sketcher

Mar. 11, 2009, 10:08 PM

It doesn't look so good for NH in Table 3.

The "live free or die" mentality works great... until you really need something you can't get on your own.

Yep. Have to agree. I guess that is when you get to choose the "or die" option.

gloriginger

Mar. 11, 2009, 10:11 PM

I thiiiiiiinnnnnnnkkk he might be a stallion. I can't see under there. but he acts like one and its a common marketing ploy to use small children to show how nice your should be a gelding stallion is.

Probably - I've known many very sweet Arabian Stallions- not at all agreeing with having a little kid lead him around with a rope draggin on the ground- just sayin' that the horse is very cute in the video- otherwhise this could have ended very, very badly- what a moron.

Hum. Anyone care to bet how long it will be before this peach is flavor du jour on FHOTH?

MistyBlue

Mar. 11, 2009, 10:12 PM

Possibly, they're not getting positive attention in quite a few online locations. Not to mention they had to disable the comments on both videos shortly after the videos started the rounds on the various equine BBs. Before the comments were disabled...the general consensus seemed to be experienced horse people blasting them and not supporting their "I'm anti government and can starve my horses if I want to!" crap. When they didn't get the type of attention they wanted...they disabled the comments. Now that many BBs are making fun of their ridiculous over-acting while they saddled up their drama-llamas on camera they're now taking the videos down too.
Apparently it's hurting their new "give us money" blog they started today hoping for cash donations.
They're also planting trolls on other BBs trying to ferret out the locations of the horses and on the underground BB they're all chattering about finding out where the horses are so they can go harass and scare the people who may be fostering them. They have members driving around NH peeking in backyards looking for any horses they can find and reporting back. They like to play at being scary.
So if anyone on here is in NH in the general Candia area...and has horses at home...keep a good eye out for any slow drive by cars. These folks couldn't tell an arab from shetland. They also seem to think the horses "stolen" by the SPCA were Arab Race Horses worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. (my rolly eyes are just too tired by this point)

Kementari

Mar. 11, 2009, 10:51 PM

Kementari...there's been talk on the underground sooper sekret bb of getting groups of FSers together to go protest outside the vet's office and telling all the clients that he steals horses and lies about their condition. They state they want to drive off his business.
Sounds like a whole group of nutters...bunch of grown ups acting like teenagers playacting.
They make the idea of Free State laughable.

:rolleyes: (My rolly eyes still work - for the moment... ;)) If they do that, I sincerely hope Dr. George gets their names and numbers and sues them up one side and down the other for defamation.

Fairview, one thing is for sure: -30 is no weather for HUMANS! My horse seemed happy enough (though she was wearing three blankets - a liner, a lightweight, and her midweight turnout), but *I* nearly got frostbite in the five minutes it took me to add the third layer (which was actually the middle layer), and I couldn't feel my feet (inside my winter Mt Horse boots) for a good half hour afterwards. :eek:

I'm glad I don't live in the Candia area - my horse really IS an Arab, so you don't even have to distinguish her from a Shetland. :lol: Though my TB who's leased out is only about a half hour from there.... :eek:

MistyBlue

Mar. 11, 2009, 11:11 PM

Agreed...I might like winter and enjoy frosty cold days. But negative 30 without windchill is too darned cold for me. At least I would assume it is...I've been in -30 windchills but not -30 without it. That's close to hell freezing over, isn't it? :winkgrin:
Interesting development on this case...on another BB one of the foster folks hopped in to state that the horses she has *did* need to be taken away from the owners and that she's ashamed of the FSers because she's also a FSer but one of the sane educated ones. Good for her for saying what she did.

<3OTTB

Mar. 12, 2009, 06:02 AM

Kementari...there's been talk on the underground sooper sekret bb of getting groups of FSers together to go protest outside the vet's office and telling all the clients that he steals horses and lies about their condition. They state they want to drive off his business.
Sounds like a whole group of nutters...bunch of grown ups acting like teenagers playacting.
They make the idea of Free State laughable.

HIt the nail on the head! Those must be the stupid ones who lack common sense or they are sooooooo naive that they bought Heidi'd drama tape.

These people who will be doing this need to take a step back and THINK!!!!!

I personally will never associate with anything the freestaters are involved with or put on EVER again because of this. WTHHHHis wrong with these people? Do they also think it's OK if these horses start to die? BEcause they are property? SICK!

MistyBlue

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:15 PM

Lovely arguments on the Free Stater BB:

so what shelters are on their farm?

This might be a bit provocative, but I don't really care...

What does it matter if they had ANY shelters on their farm? Are horses 'people' or 'property'? If they're 'property' (which I do believe they are) the Travis' have every RIGHT to do with them as they please.

I'm not looking to be a jackass, really. My wife and I own a horse and have cared for horses. We like them, we care for them, and we take good care of them. My point is that your horse is a piece of your property, like any other property you might have been led to believe you 'own', and as such you ought to be able to handle and dispose of as you wish. I don't have to agree with how you want to care for and dispose of your property so long as it interferes with my rights. Do you wish to interfere with mine?

Try not to see this in the way that the mainstream does, because they're dead wrong. See this for what it is; a property rights issue.

so what shelters are on their farm?

I dont' care and I guess Brian doesn't feel he has to answer you.
There is nothing the spca could say that would make me feel it is right to take their horses. I don't really want to dig into their private lives to decide if the use of force is appropriate.
Even if they were somehow mistreating the animals ... I don't think I have a right to take them away. The horses are the Travis' problem. I support them getting them back from the thugs.

Quote from: BillKauffman on Today at 05:07 PM (http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=17356.msg289489#msg289489)
Quote
Try not to see this in the way that the mainstream does, because they're dead wrong. See this for what it is; a property rights issue.

Most people believe it is inhumane to mistreat an animal.

Uh huh. And most people believe that the government is only here to help too. Is an animal property in your mind, or not? And to use a line my mother used to use on me on you... if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, would you?

Morons. They don't believe in humane treatment of animals being covered by laws since animals are considered property. If someone wants to starve them to death or beat them senseless...then Power To The People!
Boy do these people give Free Stating a black eye.

They're still chatting about everyone doing drive bys all over the state looking for the horses so they can mass there and harass the foster homes.

BuddyRoo

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:25 PM

unbelieveable...so only if you're human do you get any sort of guarantee of appropriate treatment? A horse is a bicycle? Just a piece of property?

I mean you'd THINK that they'd at least get their legal mumbo jumbo correct. A horse is LIVESTOCK. (heck how many times have we debated the livestock vs pet thing?) And LIVESTOCK may very well be property but only because the LAW (GUVMINT) deems it so. And therefore, if you're going to accept that our GUVMINT recognizes your livestock as your property as opposed to say...a free agent...then do you not also have to accept that said livestock is also offered under the law a certain set of basic requirements for care?

Wowza.

seeuatx

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:28 PM

If it weren't for the Guvmint creating LAWS to dispute the idea, WOMEN would still be considered property too. Of course I'm sure some of the authors of those moronic statements still believe that. :rolleyes:

Ambrey

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:28 PM

Kids too. They are my kids, I do what I want (at least I've seen that argument in the past from these sorts of people).

Only adult males over the age of 18 are actually people and deserving of protection under the law.

<3OTTB

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:49 PM

Hey - surprised this is still here. They've been having friends invade forums and remove posts. So much for "free" speach.

Anyhow - more drama:

CASTLEWOOD FARM WORK PARTY
What: Repair of shelters damaged by recent storms,
and completion of other shelters on the property.
Saturday Marth 14th; 8AM - 5PM (or when we're done)
at Travis' Family home 456 Critchet Road, Candia, NH
Bring tools and warm clothes!

Then we'll head up to Bristol for:

TRAVIS LEGAL DEFENSE FUNDRAISER
SATURDAY MARCH 14TH; 7PM - 12AM
AT IVY'S SPICE OF LIFE
8 CENTRAL SQUARE BRISTOL NH
(remember we're BYOB)

if you're on facebook you can RSVP here:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=89479245728

More info on the Travis family situation is here:
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=12+horses+seized+by+police%2 c+state+NHSPCA&articleId=738b174f-a152-4044-8f69-9f5efee2faac
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=At+issue%3a+Were+seized+Cand ia+horses+at+risk%3f&articleId=f2af1271-779f-4dd4-b4dc-a7b9cb41066c
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=No+health+certificates+found +for+seized+horses&articleId=91918a7f-671b-43ad-8909-f359a695909d

If you'd like to contribute to the Travis' legal defense fund but can not attend the fundraiser, see here:
http://cwf.chipin.com/heidi-legal-defense

I know "Ivy" oh cripes - birds of a feather flock together. Too bad the horses couldn't run around raising money and screaming anarchy. Not sure if everyone's been reading the posts on the newpaper sites but they still all for some reason skip over the sentence that says "horses taken for medical reasons and improper shelter".

<3OTTB

Mar. 12, 2009, 07:56 PM

Just wanted to add - for those of you from NE, the storm they are referring to is the ice storm before Christmas. Not exactly "recent" when your horses are standing out in harsh NE weather after enduring a long haul from CO which is a totally different climate.

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 12, 2009, 08:05 PM

BlazinSaddleMan

Mar. 12, 2009, 08:28 PM

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 12, 2009, 08:42 PM

I had a feeling we had a lurker. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

seeuatx

Mar. 12, 2009, 08:46 PM

Heeeeere's Johhny! :lol::winkgrin::lol:

<3OTTB

Mar. 12, 2009, 09:24 PM

I still want to know why AC was there because of a lack of shelter in November, but left the horses there thru a NE winter, only to remove them in March, when temperatures are moderating, and spring is just around the corner.

Not sure if you read all the articles but it's mentioned that some were taken because of medical issues as well. If you watch the first video from Nov the owners of the propety were not present so when the SPCA came to visit non-homeowners (who look pretty young) did not give him permission to enter the property. I would also imagine that it takes more then just "you have no shelter, I'm taking your horses". They probably have to give a time frame for things to be done and revisit. They came with a warrant and I believe that's an indication of something serious going on. Plus March is still a rough month for NH weather wise.

MistyBlue

Mar. 12, 2009, 09:59 PM

Horses Seized in Candia
http://www.forumhome.org/clients/forumhome/3-10-2009-7-35-59-PM-6757256.jpgMaureen Mann 14.MAR.09

On March 9, members of the Candia Police Force, along with two veterinarians and members of the New Hampshire SPCA, used a search warrant to examine approximately 25 horses at the home of Brian Travis and Heidi Fredrick in Candia. Of those horses examined, twelve were taken from the property, six for medical reasons and because they were emaciated, and an additional six because there was not proper shelter available.
According to sources involved, Steve Sprowl of the NH SPCA warned the landowners this past November that shelter had to be provided for the animals or they would be seized. At that time police had come to the property at Sprowl’s request to investigate a tip that the horses did not have adequate shelter.
The two veterinarians, from TNT Equine in Dover and Deerfield Veterinary Services in Deerfield, were called in by the SPCA to verify there was a medical reason to take the horses. Neither of the veterinarians had contacted the SPCA. A spokesperson for the Deerfield veterinarian said they were there to see that “the animals’ best interests were first and foremost.”
In addition to the perceived lack of shelter, some required documentation was not made available when requested. While many people do not keep copies of the Health Certificate required to take an animal across state lines, a Coggins Certificate for each animal should be available. This is an official United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) document that shows a horse has been tested for Equine Infectious Anemia [EIA] and has a negative result. This is an extremely infectious disease. Horses testing positive are euthanized and other animals with which they come in contact are quarantined.

Efforts to reach Sprowl were unsuccessful. A Candia Police Department press release provided the following information:
On Monday, March 9, 2009, the Candia Police Department executed a search warrant at a residence on Critchett Road. The New hampshire Society of the Protection of Cruelty to Animals assisted. 12 horses were removed from the property for welfare and inadequate shelter reasons. The case is still under investigation.Speaking anonymously, one of those involved in the incident said they did not feel this is a case of animal abuse, but more an issue of having too many horses to care for.

The owners have also claimed not knowing horses required Coggins to cross state lines. Yet then claim they have a hundred thousand dollars worth of show and race Arabians. Can't show without a Coggins. Can't race without one. Can't cross state lines without one. Can't get into a boarding barn without one. 4H kids know this. An "experienced horse pro" knew this too.
The other BB is also trying to dowplay the abandoned and emaciated horses left in CO by this same couple. Stating the matter was investigated and dismissed. The truth of the matter is...the case was dropped because the owners left the state and crossed the country. They cannot go after them for this due to llimited funds. Had they stayed in the area...they'd be in court very soon since the case wasn't dismissed due to lack of a problem or evidence. It was dismissed due to lack of people nearby to prosecute.
The folks over there won't mention *that* tidbit of advice though. Nope...far better to drum up righteous false indignation with lack of facts. And harbor known neglectors, stand up for them and cover the idiocy with chest beating claims of "they're property! beat them, starve them, but don't you dare call the government about it! Your neighbors only have the right to correct you for that!"

MistyBlue

Mar. 12, 2009, 10:14 PM

Oh...and welcome Lumpy to Coth.
You'll notice that this is an extremely large international equine BB populated heavily by professionals in all aspects of the equine industry.
It's not a political BB at all...as evidenced by our infrequent Off Topic days when politics can be discussed. :winkgrin: (those are hilarious threads) But what you can find here is a ton of very good and up to date information on *correct* equine care. This BB has very very few supporters of Animal Rights...but does have a very heavy amount of supporters of Animal Welfare. There is an immense difference between the two.
Nobody is into bad SPCA raids and there have been past threads on this subject quite a few times.
There are also Libertarians on here also.
You will find this BB doesn't suffer ignorance, trolling or fools lightly...so please don't come just to try to poke a hornet's nest. This isn't a political BB.
We're not anti people's rights either. It is pretty obvious that a small (but avid) percentage of the FSers have decided to back up these owners to the fullest despite the facts of the cases (past and present) pointing out that they're maybe supporting the dregs of their member list.

** = correct not meant as a personal opinion forced on another but a humane welfare of said animal. Not stating to coddle or raise the animal above the human's rights but to care for it in a way conducive to it's health as it's not just inanimate property but a living breathing being. The bare minimum of a standard of care befitting livestock.

Ambrey

Mar. 12, 2009, 10:14 PM

In between the previous visit and the visit in which the horses were taken, there was a vet called out who later worked to support the seizure. It sounds to me like the condition of the horses changed.

MistyBlue

Mar. 12, 2009, 10:27 PM

so an animal owner could last their dog daily for no reason just because they own it?

could they hook a car battery up to an animal just for grins because they own it?

could they burn the animal with a blowtorch because they own it?

the list goes on... really are things like that ok because you own the animal?

Yes. I think that an owner of property can do whatever he wants with his property. I do not think that taking a brand new car that you own and driving it off a cliff (that you also own, let's say) is a good use of your property, but you have the right to do it. I think it's far worse to torture or harm or kill an animal you own, but it is your animal - you have the right. If I don't like it, I will possibly resort to voluntaryist methods of dealing with it - not drawing an arbitrary "line" over which I assert you have crossed and therefore it is now "right" for something to happen to you.

This is one of the very many reasons the sane and educated FSers are steering 100% clear of that Bb and this case. Many of them are not saying a word anywhere except to state they're embarassed over the comments made on that BB.
FWIW...on the equinesite bb before the thread was closed...another FSer spoke up loud and clear against this BB and these folks. Knowing a few of them personally...and this FSer is overseeing a couple of the seized animals herself. She stated the animals weren't in good condition at all and were probably eating decently for the first time in a long time. And that she abhorred the way the NHU BB was spouting nonsense and trying scare tactics.

Ambrey...the vet was called to the property by the horse owners for a mare that had an injury. Vet treated, left meds and wraps and charged them. owners were pissed about the cost, but paid according to them on the other BB. A neighbor then reported the owners to the SPCA...second call to the SPCA but possibly not from the same person. The SPCA called a few vets in the area for getting 2 to come with them to the property to check condition of animals. One of the two vets who went with them was the same vet out there 2 weeks previously on an unrelated issue. That was Dr George. He,along with the second vet, ascertained that 6 of the horses had health issues requiring them to leave for better conditions, further evaluation and treatment. 6 others were chosen to be seized due to those not having any access to shelter.(illegal in NH) The rest were left because those had adequate shelter and were in better condition. That's what the news reports have stated so far. They've sealed the warrant at this time due to the volatile nature of the owners and talk online of threats so will not reveal details at this time to keep safe any people named in the warrant as far as I know.

Fairview Horse Center

Mar. 12, 2009, 10:33 PM

Yes, it now sounds like some of the horses were not handling the lack of shelter, and dropping weight. Possibly why it is March before the seizure - more to do with how the horses were handling it. They can handle the cold if they have any kind of a half decent wind break, but they will drop weight if not given plenty of hay.

I am ADAMANTLY opposed to bad seizures, and have been VERY outspoken about he Chicago fiasco, to the point of capturing and posting photos of the healthy horses from the video. This is not the case here. These people's video proved that their concern was not about the horses.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 02:35 AM

One of the seized horses was purchased from us in December. We have known about this family for several years and they always came with good reviews from other breeders/owners. They have/had a serious show and breeding program with horses that have some good show titles.

Unfortunately, even though I am still the registered owner of the mare....I doubt I will be able to get her back because she is considered "evidence".

And I have no way of contacting the place she is at to let them know that she is Insulin Resistant and in need of a special diet....for all I know, if she's been on grain since Monday, she may well already be in bad trouble with founder. She was on the light side in December after coming off of weaning a very needy colt, it was also just the condition she generally kept herself in due to her body type, and due to past founder we did not allow her to get heavy. But she was not emaciated when she left us....of course, I do not know what condition she is in now. I did not find out about this until yesterday and it was through a chat site that I found out.

She is a 15.1H bay mare with a black mane and tail. She has roaning on the rear pasterns and heels and a roan spot just past her withers on her back. Her front feet toe in just ever so slightly and one hoof has a higher heel than the other. She has very VERY large eyes and her ears V out just a little. She has not registered white markings but this time of year it looks like she has a small white snip between her nostrils. She has a vaginal tear that is old and was left open (meaning that she does not have a caslicks in at this time) since she was not being re-bred in 08. She may, or may not, have had a green blanket with gold trim on as I sent her with that. Her name is BG Backflash. I have extensive photos from the day I bought her to last year. She also had a 2008 Coggins and Rabies certificate.

If ANYONE knows how to get in touch with the people who have her so that I can get them info on what she needs to eat and find out how I can get her back...please let me know!!!!

Cheers,
Amanda

<3OTTB

Mar. 13, 2009, 05:43 AM

Amanda - do you need help? Please PM me. I have a friend of a friend of a friend........:)

<3OTTB

Mar. 13, 2009, 05:55 AM

Amanda - I am working on it. Another option is you to call Steve Sprowl of the NHSPCA and give them the info.

I wonder why she bought a horse from you, already having so many, when she had just moved from NH to CO having her CO place forclosed on.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 06:33 AM

I'd contact the SPCA directly and inform them of the issues. And also contact the owners directly to see if that was one of the mares confiscated. Right now so many people are popping up asking for the location of the horses and the SPCA is the one to ask.
There are quite a few FSers posing as other people trying to find the locations and for the safety of the people fostering the horses it's best to go through the right channels.
There are Free Staters with the same name as mckulley...so to stay safe all around it's probably best to go through the legal channels to get the info out on the IR mare.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:29 AM

Amanda- go to Arabian Breeders network - there are some other breeders that have been in contact with Heidi- you could PM them and get her contact info to find out if your horse was one siezed.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:45 AM

Mckulley is the name of a long deceased yet very dear dog. It has nothing to do with an FS.... I'm not entirely sure what the org is all about but my guess would be that people should be VERY careful with their segregation tactics based on others personal beliefs.

*****

At any rate, my NUMBER ONE priority is to get info to who ever has BG so she can be fed properly. With in a few days of being on a non-carb safe feed she will start to founder. Hay doesn't seem to be an issue for her...but grain is a big one. And if she's just her typical light condition and they think it's due to lack of feed and use that against these folks, well that's just not fare. And then god forbid if they start shoving the food down her throat... I can't even think about it. But if she is in bad shape, and does need some help, they have to know how to go about doing it.

My NUMBER TWO priority is to find out if there is any way to get her back at some point. I understand that she is no longer "my property" as she was sold. But I am STILL the recorded owner....

My husband is a Police Officer and he is adamant that I do not get involved beyond trying to get information to whoever has her so they know how she can be fed and perhaps if there is some kind of list where I can put my name down to take her if they'll release her.

****

Heidi wanted her because she had always wanted a Backstreet+ daughter. BG is one of his youngest daughters, the line is not a young one. She ALWAYS paid on time and the one time she got behind she caught right back up without any fuss.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:49 AM

I should add that I fully well know that BG was one of the group that was taken. I saw the thread at SE.com that Laurie put up. I called Laurie, we talked, Thank God her colt was not in the group. So I called Heidi and she told me that BG was in the group that was taken.

Thomas_1

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:50 AM

If that's the extent of a defence then they need serious help !

I'm thinking the snivelling lady at the start definitely won't be up for an Oscar nomination!

I'm personally not understanding why any good owner would be getting their nickers in a knot because they had a visit from a vet and welfare authorities who are responding to a concern.

The guy making the commentary sounds like a right stupid fool!

The bit that made me roll my eyes to the top of my head was their exception to being "disarmed". Yeh too right. I personally wouldn't want a fruit loop like that running round with a video camera AND a gun!

For sure his approach is not one I'd recommend in such circumstances if you've nothing to be concerned about and are proud of what you do.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:56 AM

Many of the people fostering are reading this BB and a couple others. They've already gotten the info on BG through your posts. Good idea posting it on a few big BBs. The info will be circulated through the network of fosters most likely.
To get your name out there as a person interested in BG, you need to contact the SPCA directly. Without that contact they won't know there's another home for BG. However since this was a first seizure for a second offense there's little likelihood of the horses being adopted out. Most likely they'll be returned to the owners after quarantine and Coggins are done and enough shelters for all of Heidi's horses are built.
Payment records aside, you might want to go check on BG at some point if/when she's returned. Heidi has abandoned horses in CO recently and left them to fend for themselves when she moved to NH. The folks cleaning up the mess she left couldn't press charges despite trying due to them being halfway across the country. So the issue was dropped as the folks in CO had to rally to care for the 26 or so horses she left behind. With a history like that...let's just say as a breeder I'd want to keep an eye on that situation if I had a previous horse of mine with them.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:15 AM

I PM'd 3OTTB with her exact needs and her quirks....I hope it gets to her foster parents.

trubandloki

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:27 AM

One would think that if Heidi cared at all about her horses that were being seized she would have told the animal control officers about this mare's special needs requirements. But gee, I guess they are just property, hu?

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:41 AM

arabhorse2

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:48 AM

McKully, this shouldn't have been a surprise to these people.

They'd already been under investigation for the same thing in CO, and had been visited by the AC in NH at least once prior.

Their whole thing is "individual rights" and what they consider as their property. These are not regular horse loving owners.

Anyone who would say that they have a right to do with their property as they please, up to and including starvation and not meeting basic needs, are not animal lovers.

I don't believe in animal rights, but I'm very much for animal welfare. Mistreatment is against the law, regardless of what they think they should be able to do with their own animals.

So no, you can't compare their reactions to those of regular, sane people who only want what's best for their animals.

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:51 AM

I would guess that by the time they started taking horses, she probably was not in her right mind. There's not a person on this board that wouldn't be going bonkers if someone came to take their horses. Especially if you believe you're not in the wrong.

Nobody who has horses taken believes they are in the wrong. Sorry, this is the same old story here- person has (mumble mumble) horses that they are not taking proper care of, some skinny and sick, yet doesn't see the problem and is AGHASTED when the authorities come to take them away. It gets played out over and over again, all over the country.

I would guess the number of seizures in which the person is able to say "they were right, I wasn't taking proper care of them" is very low, yet most of the time when the information comes out the seizures are totally justified.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:52 AM

I'm sorry, this is where my conversation ends. I mentioned this in my first post.

I NEED the foster owners to know of BG's needs.

And if it comes down to her being placed, well, I want to be the one she is placed with.

BG is my sole and only priority in this matter. But I can only do what I'm legally able to do.

arabhorse2

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:02 AM

But what does BG's welfare have to do with your defense of these people? I don't see the correlation.

If she's being fostered, she's being taken care of. As was already mentioned, since BG belongs to these people, and if they manage to clean up their act, she'll go back to them. I'm not sure you have any legal recourse in the matter, having sold the horse.

Regardless of the fact that you still hold her papers, you took money for the animal, so you aren't her legal owner. If these people can prove money changed hands, then you're up a creek without a paddle.

It's good that you want the AC people to know her physical needs and issues. But as far as getting her back? You sold her; she's not yours any longer, and you don't get to have a say where she goes.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:03 AM

OTTB said she doesn't know where BG's at so just in case the foster people are here:

BG she needs a Carbohydrate safe feed such as Poulin Grain Carb Safe and PLAIN beet pulp. NO beet pulp with sugar! NO regular grain. NO oil. No sugar treats.

Usually she can have regular hay but if their hay is very rich they'll need to soak it in a barrel of water for one hour, drain water, and feed her the hay. They can't let the hay sit longer than an hour or it will re-absorb the sugar it put into the water. NO ALFALFA!

She can't be straight tied but she can be cross tied. You have to be careful rubbing her neck on the non-mane side because (she came to me this way) she shies terribly.

She's a 1991 mare. I have pictures if they aren't sure they have her.

Amanda

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:04 AM

She'd already left 26 behind to starve and wasn't concerned with providing shelter for the ones she took along with her. It wouldn't be a stretch to imagine she wouldn't care to remember one horse is IR when taken.
In the video she's seen standing by quietly and calmly a few times...watching over things and always making sure to be in the camera's view. At more than one point glacing at the camera and backing up or moving position to make sure she's visible. Camera man talking calmly to her, no reaction from her. She only reacts almost as if on cue for the tears scene and the "Help police" scream. Before that at any moment she could have mentioned that one mare may be IR and requires a certain feeding program. She doesn't.
FSP member or not...had this been a bad seizure the rest of the equine community would throw their weight behind it. And believe me...it's a hefty weight. They *far* outnumber the FSP members and have more public and governmental respect. The equine public isn't amused about the views the FSP takes over animals not requiring outside help if abused or neglected under the law. (not an arbitrary opinion) It's also not amused over the rally to try to return animals to a person with a history of neglect, who apparently doesn't believe animals need shelter in winter, who claims to be a professional in the horse world and then claims to not know anything about Coggins being necessary, etc. Not a thing adds up...the video is beyond ridiculous, the claims made on other sites are beyond ridiculous and at the end of the day...the horses are what's going to be considered over the property violation because that's the law. And it's a law that's there due to the majority of people wanting it there and supporting it.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:08 AM

mckulley...my best thoughts go out to the mare BG.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:11 AM

Arabhorse2, you have a BAD attitude. It's not needed in this already volatile situation.

And for the record, I'm not defending anyone. But I have full working knowledge of how the human mind and system works under times of extreme duress. So I can see why things may not have been said.

arabhorse2

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:16 AM

Misty, I doubt very seriously that these folks are going to clean up their act, so it's unlikely the seized horses will go back to them. To be honest, I'm hoping the rest of the horses will be taken.

I'm glad that BG's former owner wants to get the info out about the mare and her requirements, however, she has no legal claim to the horse.

I just find the whole thing repugnant.

If BG's former owner wanted a say in where the horse goes, then she shouldn't have sold her. I'm also wondering why she never handed over BG's registration papers when she sold the horse. With Arabians, especially breeding animals, the registration papers are a very big deal.

I don't care that her husband's an LEO, except for the fact that he should know the legality of her trying to bullhorn her way into getting the horse back from AC.

Not saying I wouldn't want a horse back that I'd sold, if I found out I'd sold them to abusive asshats. Just saying that I wouldn't expect special treatment by AC, just because I once owned the animal.

If they're willing to give the animal back to her since she knows the mare and how to care for her, that would probably be the best case scenario for the horse. But it's not something she can count on.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:17 AM

Is there any legal documents on this CO case? I just don't understand why I wouldn't have heard of it....especially when I know other people with good reputations who sold horses to her who LIVE in CO.

Does anyone have this Steve persons phone number?

arabhorse2

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:18 AM

Arabhorse2, you have a BAD attitude. It's not needed in this already volatile situation.

No, I don't agree.

What I see is a former owner who now has seller's remorse, but who has no legal claim to the animal in question.

It's a public forum. You don't like my opinion? Too bad, so sad for you.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:19 AM

Well Arabhorse2, FYI I did send her registration over to Heidi but Heidi has not transferred her into her name yet.

[edit] Excuse me for sitting up since Wednesday trying to figure out how I could have let this happen to a horse of mine.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:25 AM

Look, if anyone has this Steve persons phone number, I'd be most appreciative to have it. PM would be great.

The ONLY reason why I posted on this forum was because I know how nosey and violent it can get here and figured it'd be the fastest way, after working hours, to get info out to who ever has this mare.

I don't need any bull crap from any anonymous poster here who thinks they know the answers to everything. YOU try having this situation on your shoulders with little more ability than to pass information around.

If BG needs a home, I'm here for her. If I can't do anything more than get info to the people who have her, then I'll have to live with that.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:26 AM

The ACO officer? 411 can give you the phone number...I don't have it on hand. You can also google it easily enough. Your husband should also have the number available for when he has to call them when they find abused or neglected animals.
There are town hall minutes on the horses she left behind there. They're easily found on google. The people involved are all named in the document and are easily contacted for the full story. They have no reason to lie and there isn't any conspiracy theories unless you count the one the Travis' are trying to drum up that they have fine horses and fine conditions and the vet wanted to steal them and colluded with the SPCA to get those horses for himself to sell. :rolleyes:

This is yet another great lesson for dealers, breeders, sales barn owners:
When selling horses buy backs clauses aren't worth much of anything.
When selling horses do a quick online search for background information.
When selling horses if the transaction doesn't make sense (selling an unpapered young mare to a breeder) then don't go ahead with it.
When selling horses, if the buyer comes up in a search as belonging to a project that overtly claims all owners of all animals have the right to beat, starve, torture, etc their animals under some skewed idea of Liberty and human property rights...they're probably not the person you want to sell to.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:36 AM

MistyBlue,

I agree for the most part except.

You can't segregated someone due to their personal belief systems. Not to mention that this whole FS thing is entirely foreign to me and I only found out about it on Wed. It's not like they waive flags, have bumper stickers, or their skin color is different.

And as I've already mentioned, in my community, this person has a good reputation. I've known about her for going on four or five years now. Granted, I did not know her personally, but I knew people who did active business with her. And these were not small time people either.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:37 AM

"IV. Information Updates –
Jones Ranch Conservation Easement - Mr. Sprunk said the owners of Jones
Ranch property are violating their conservation easement by grazing 26 horses on
the property. Animal control officers recently posted the property and threatened
to start removing horses that were malnourished. The owner of the property has
left the state and the house is in foreclosure. Mr. Sprunk said he will try to
3
contact the Animal Welfare Officer next week to see if there was any new
information. The landowner is supposedly trying to find new homes for the
horses.
Mrs. Matthews said steps are being taken so that a title search will reveal the
conservation easement violation and make the property difficult to sell. The
County Attorney’s office will be responsible for this process. The asking price
for the property is $650,000.
Mr. Sprunk said the recent rains have at least helped the appearance of the land,
he expects the property will recover if the horses are removed.
Mrs. Matthews said a lender cannot be held liable for the violation of the
conservation easement since they were not a signatory to the easement.
Mr. Sprunk has never actually spoken with or met the owner, Heidi Fredrick. Mr.
Weston asked if we could have the Sheriff’s Office serve the letter to the owner.
Mr. Sprunk wondered how this could be accomplished if the owner is out of state.
He expects the realtor may be of some help, he must be concerned about the status
of this property.
Mr. Welle asked what the goal is at this point. Mr. Sprunk said the primary goal
is to get the horses off the property and that is happening, largely because they are being neglected."

Source: DOUGLAS COUNTY OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PUBLIC MEETING
Philip S. Miller Building
100 Third Street
Castle Rock
September 4, 2008
6:00 PM

Right after they moved...horses already in bad shape. Not due to time left alone...due to care received by the owner Heidi Fredrick who abandoned them when they refused to pay mortgage and left their animals and house in foreclosure to move to NH where they can live Free and not worry about little annoying things like animal welfare being upheld.
Charges only left alone due to distance...not lack of evidence.
Mckulley...you've got a sucky situation and it's got to be rough dealing with this. Please do understand why the equine community is unwilling to release any information on the location of the seized horses. And please do understand that most likely the IR information is known now by the foster who may have BG.
The SPCA will be the folks to contact about possibly getting the horse back. They may/may not waive an adoption fee for previous owners if they do intend to keep the horses. Be aware that no matter what, they'll not make any decisions/release any horses to anyone for at least 30-60 days depending. They're under quarantine and investigation...takes time. Approved fosters for the SPCA are all very knowledgeable folks with great facilities and a wealth of medical animal knowledge. The seized horses are all in safe, healthy environments right now so while I understand your worry at least know they're getting the correct care and attention.
It's not unsual to have neglectors/hoarders/abusers be caught and then hear "but so many people trusted them!" It's not uncommon...but the trust of others doesn't undo the things they've done. Respect from the horse community is always a great thing to have...and a good rep is wonderful. But even with those two things...a little background search never hurts.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:48 AM

FWIW, I would never segregate anyone for their personal beliefs. However, I can and would refuse them sale of an animal if their beliefs were those of many of the most verbal FSPers. Their personal beliefs are their own, my personal beliefs is to do what I can to keep my ideals up. And that includes welfare/proper care for animals, children, elderly, etc.

I don't condemn the FSP in a blanket fashion. But the ones involved in this seizure and the ones being most verbal about it are coming across as complete morons...like adults playing a constitutional version of Dungeons and Dragons. I do know other FSP folks who have mmore than a few brain cells to rub together and count them as friends. :)

trubandloki

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:48 AM

I have a hard time believing that people that had known her long term, and had seen the set up she had were willing to vouch for her horse care system.

In the video they posted themselves they show some pretty horrible horse husbandry.

As has been said several times. Look up in the phone book the number for the SPCA (or whomever took the horses), call it and tell them about the special feed requirements. I am guessing if you are not talking to the right person they will direct you to the right person.

MSP

Mar. 13, 2009, 12:08 PM

Dang! What a thread! I could not see any videos so flying blind here but...

I was raised in NH and it was my understanding that a roof and three walls was the LAW in NH. You must provide livestock with protection from the elements. This is a no brainer! No shelter, no food no more horses! I don't see what the big controversy is.

Regarding the NH bashing...
The Live free or die state has gone a little too left lately but the comments from the folks from MA demonstrate just how way left nanny state MA and its people can be. If you want to live off the government move to MA! If you work for a living NH is a good place to live. If it wasn't so cold I probably never would have left.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 12:38 PM

I think another very important detail in this whole situation that may have been addressed, but isn't as highlighted as other information- is that a few weeks ago Heidi reached out to a local rescue for help- turned over 3 horses-they could not take all of them, but Heidi later said that she had found feed.

Also important is that they have only been in NH for a short time- late fall I believe- so the family and horses are very new to NH and the property they live on - from Google earth- there are no shelters on the property- so what I gather is that there were some shelters, but not enough for the amount of horses, and there was hay. However, the hay in New England is probably not going to be rich enough to sustain a horse - especially if they are out in the elements all the time. I have an arabian that I brought from Arizona- she lived on just hay there- but it was much richer alfalfa and bernumda mix. Here - she needs concentrates and fat to keep her weight through the cold winters. They just need different things, and I would gather that Heidi didn't understand that they need the shelter and they need different feed here versus CO.

Mistyblue- it sounds like you have more details about the CO situation- did you do some research beyond the minutes from the meeting? I would be interested to know about that.

barrelchick00

Mar. 13, 2009, 12:45 PM

Wow, I just catch this thread by chance and it really saddens me that people really do this to horses. I feel for the horses who are the ones who are really suffering. Horses do need shelter and good care. I wish more people who claim to be horse lovers would do just that.
Also if they were really taking care of the horses they would be proud to show the horses off. At least most of the people I know that are real horse lovers do. Anyone wants the see my girl I'd be more than happy. So if you're not doing something wrong then why not show them everything?
I hope these horses get to good homes and the people get the book thrown at them.:yes:

<3OTTB

Mar. 13, 2009, 12:56 PM

Here's some info. I am sorry but I cannot find out which horses where taken or to where. I am highly concerned about your horse.

Steven Sprowl, Manager, Field Services Division
Office: 603-772-2921 ext. 111
cell: 603-674-9836

New Hampshire SPCA
PO Box 196
Stratham, NH 03885

info@nhspca.org

I wish you the best!!! Please let us know how you make out. I am so worried about this horse. But if she was one of the ones taken because of being very skinny then they would probably build her diet up slowly, perhaps starting with hay and hay pellets. I've rehabbed rescue horses before and it's awhile before they actually get their first grain meal. The 12 horses are also under a vet's care. Usually with cases like this they complete blood work - so maybe something caught their attention.

Best Wishes. Hang in there!!!

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 02:22 PM

[edit] Excuse me for sitting up since Wednesday trying to figure out how I could have let this happen to a horse of mine.

I think what you're sensing is a slight suspicion, not really a bad attitude. When these things happen, people pop out out the woodwork on these boards to "support" the people accused, even in the face of massive evidence that the seizures were valid (I'm not accusing you- just saying that in the past, that has been the pattern). So, people tend to get suspicious at the slightest sign of support that posters aren't who they claim to be.

It's a sad side effect of the behavior of people in the past, coming up with new usernames to try to sway public opinion. People like yourself who are have genuine interest in the specifics but aren't long time posters become victims of the suspicion it fosters.

I really, really hope you find your mare and that if she has to be sent somewhere, it's to you! In other similar situations that we've followed here at COTH, most of the time once things settle people who have genuine claims to horses are able to get them and find the authorities are cooperative in getting the horse in the best situation available.

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 02:31 PM

I was able to touch base with Steve P. Thank you 3OTTB, I was able to catch him on his cell. He had received an email with the specifics for her feeding and I sent him all of the photos I have of her so they could identify her.

Unfortunately, all I have currently is the fact I'm still her registered owner. But I'm not going to lie and say I own the mare when she was very validly paid for.

However, he knows that if this comes down to needing to find homes, that I will, with out a doubt, be available for BG.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 02:37 PM

That's good...so they know they have someone already interested and willing and with horse knowledge to take one of the horses if it gets to that point. :) Best of luck getting her back.

trishiemo

Mar. 13, 2009, 03:59 PM

McKulley1- if the fosters do not know, I will ensure they do tomorrow.I have an IR horse so I know the signs well, I will check up on her!

cowgirljenn

Mar. 13, 2009, 04:23 PM

I would guess the number of seizures in which the person is able to say "they were right, I wasn't taking proper care of them" is very low, yet most of the time when the information comes out the seizures are totally justified.

I've had a couple of cases where the owners say, 'We didn't know how to take care of them!'. And I've had times where we've shown up, the owners said they knew they weren't doing well by their horses, and asked us to take them (they surrendered them without a seizure). When it gets to an actual seizure, though, most owners scream and rant and rave. I've had them point to horses in BC of 1-2 and tell us those horses are just fine. *sigh*

quietann

Mar. 13, 2009, 04:29 PM

Regarding the NH bashing...
The Live free or die state has gone a little too left lately but the comments from the folks from MA demonstrate just how way left nanny state MA and its people can be. If you want to live off the government move to MA! If you work for a living NH is a good place to live. If it wasn't so cold I probably never would have left.

Sure. And I pay more taxes because NH dumps their people unable to work in MA. (Seriously. Not everyone can work. The girl with the head injury, *had she been treated and sent to rehab promptly, which NH state WOULD NOT do,* would have likely been a fully productive member of society rather than "living off the government" for the rest of her life -- which could be 40 or 50 years. I hope she would have come to MA anyway, if she'd gotten prompt treatment -- NH does not deserve her.)

mckulley1

Mar. 13, 2009, 04:58 PM

Thank you. Maybe if you could just post how she is after you see her? Or PM me privately?

McKulley1- if the fosters do not know, I will ensure they do tomorrow.I have an IR horse so I know the signs well, I will check up on her!

MSP

Mar. 13, 2009, 05:20 PM

Sure. And I pay more taxes because NH dumps their people unable to work in MA. (Seriously. Not everyone can work. The girl with the head injury, *had she been treated and sent to rehab promptly, which NH state WOULD NOT do,* would have likely been a fully productive member of society rather than "living off the government" for the rest of her life -- which could be 40 or 50 years. I hope she would have come to MA anyway, if she'd gotten prompt treatment -- NH does not deserve her.)

So why didn't she go! Did they lock her out? Not getting it? I used MA hospitals if they were better suited, what difference does that make?

How is NH responsible for the type of health care this woman did or didn't pursue? Good grief people its a state not your momma.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 05:58 PM

I've had a couple of cases where the owners say, 'We didn't know how to take care of them!'. And I've had times where we've shown up, the owners said they knew they weren't doing well by their horses, and asked us to take them (they surrendered them without a seizure). When it gets to an actual seizure, though, most owners scream and rant and rave. I've had them point to horses in BC of 1-2 and tell us those horses are just fine. *sigh*

These owners wrote on another BB that horses have been fending for themselves for thousands of years, that they don't need shelter because the grow big fur coats that protect them from the weather.

spurgirl

Mar. 13, 2009, 07:04 PM

Gloriginger, I had also read on another site that comment about horses "not needing shelter because they grow those big fur coats", etc., etc., wonder why those owners saw any reason to keep soaking wet blankets on half of them then,WTH?:(

The video I saw on youtube was so asinine...drama llamas, indeed, comparing horse seizure to the holocaust, are they for real? The best defense they could have had was to tell the ACO's and vets that were there to remove those blankets to videotape the horses' body scores right then. For some reason I doubt they wanted to do that ...As$hats!! I hope the horses turn out OK!

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 08:37 PM

These owners wrote on another BB that horses have been fending for themselves for thousands of years, that they don't need shelter because the grow big fur coats that protect them from the weather.

Yes, the horses that evolved to live in the wild in NH maybe. Arabians...NOT SO MUCH.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 08:49 PM

Yes, the horses that evolved to live in the wild in NH maybe. Arabians...NOT SO MUCH.

that's funny on 2 levels- 1 I don't knwo too many wild horses in NH? and 2 - thinking of my own Arabian in her heavy weight blanket and hood, with a fresh load of shavings in her stall, and her very calorie rich dinner of 10% fat feed, warm beet pulp, rice bran, apple sauce, carrot bits topped with a few peppermints- a couple kisses and scratches to the ears. :)

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 08:56 PM

that's funny on 2 levels- 1 I don't knwo too many wild horses in NH?

I agree, although my half welsh pony could probably survive that winter. His winter coat grows to about 3". I've yet to see an arab with that kind of coat.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:02 PM

yeah, we had a pony for half the winter-she looked like a woolly mamoth, grew to fat and furry for her blanket! During the ice storm she had icicles hanging off her. She was one tough little pony!

<3OTTB

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:23 PM

Apparently these native wild arabian horses in NH thrive without shelter, doing their best in panel pens. I hear they evolved originally from CO but migrated to NH. If you have one of these rare, native, wild Arabians they are worth $100,000's:yes: They do not require any sort of testing that other horses are bound to by law. And if the gubmint steals them from you, you get to star in your own melodrama complete with a towel. :winkgrin:

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:26 PM

Well of course the gubmint wants them! They are worth $100,000's! Because they are SPECIAL! They are so special that the gubmint brings REALLY NICE TRUCKS to take them away from you!

<3OTTB

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:41 PM

http://blogofbile.com/2009/03/13/heidi-legal-defense-fund/

blog of bile is right!!!!

quietann

Mar. 13, 2009, 09:57 PM

So why didn't she go! Did they lock her out? Not getting it? I used MA hospitals if they were better suited, what difference does that make?

How is NH responsible for the type of health care this woman did or didn't pursue? Good grief people its a state not your momma.

Um... 20 year old young woman. No health insurance, no money, no job, no family... and a fairly serious head injury. She *did* go to MA, and that was because her NH social worker told her that she had no chance of getting any rehab in NH, so she should go to MA. NH washed their hands of her. The delay in care because of having to move and wait to qualify for Medicaid made her ultimate outcome much worse -- full dependency on the state, versus what could have been a full recovery if she'd been able to get into rehab promptly.

YOU try pursuing anything with a serious head injury. Have you been paying *any* attention at all to what's happening with Iraq war vets with combat related head injuries -- who are guaranteed care by the VA but don't necessarily get it?

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:10 PM

http://blogofbile.com/2009/03/13/heidi-legal-defense-fund/

blog of bile is right!!!!

what is that?

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:38 PM

One of the FSPers' blogs. It's quite funny. Tomorrow they are all getting together (the FSPers) to have a work day at the owners' farm to help them repair and/or build shelters. I am hoping they have the specifics needed for the type of shelters required.
If any are reading here...I think the NH guidelines are that each full sized horse (not a pony) requires a 10x10 area under shelter. So a 3 sided run in shed 10x30 is adequate for 3 horses. A 20x30 for 6 horses, etc. Although with spans it's probably easier to make multiple smaller ones that are more easily moved from paddock to paddock. Some advice to the FSPers on shelter building...if the owners are indeed planning a full sized barn raising when the weather improves (now is a tough time for a full building due to ground conditions) then a way to help that along is to build longer shedrow type shelters that can then be connected to make a single barn later in the season. Killing two birds with one stone per se. Say building a 10x60 long narrow run in and then a twin of the that one. Either build them with anywhere from 10-15' seperating them as they face open sides to one another or build them in a way they can be moved to face each other with an aisle width seperating...and then in spring you can very easily and inexpensively add a peaked roof connecting the two to form a 12 stall center aisle barn with a peaked floored hay loft covering the aisle. This is a common way the Amish build the barns they market to the non-Amish who hire them and they make excellent barns with good storage and use of space and good ventilation. Doors can be added to the end of the aisle and only dividing walls and doors needed for stalls later on if you want seperate stalls.
We're not unreasonable people here...and can provide all sorts of good ideas to those of you non-equine-owning members who want to help your horse-folk friends. Please do consider keeping a closer eye on them in the future though. Despite your inability to accept the *facts* that they've got a history of extremely piss-poor livestock husbandry issues...there actually is quite a history there. The more information being gathered by the hour by many folks...the worse it looks. They may indeed have hoarding issues...and hoarding is a mental glitch that makes folks come across as very caring of their animals when they indeed make things horrid for them. If so, they will really really need your continued support and surveillance. I realize this goes against the beliefs you all hold...but if you can all rally to help a person out then you can all rally to make sure they don't continue to backslide and give your organization a black eye to the general public. Because the ideal you seem to to striving for...the liberty type of lifestyle the original settlers had...hinged completely on the neighbors all actually living in each others' pockets. They could not survive without organized community help...and that included keeping an eye on each other. Because one bad apple could bring down the entire community. And FWIW...back then it was considered more "MYOB" if a man drank a little too much and beat his wife once a week but it was *never* tolerated if a man worked his stock too hard or cared for it poorly. Families would be run out of town for having skinny oxen, men could be shot or hanged for stealing a horse but not for stealing a wife. What's that tell y'all? A community and organization is hinged on and judged by how they treat those living members who cannot speak for/protect themselves. The elderly, the children and the animals. And back then...in the times that are being so cherished now...the animals did indeed come first. :yes:

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:50 PM

Oh that's good news. I am glad that they are putting energy into helping the Travis' - I suggested that to "John" on the equinesite before they pulled the thread.

It does sound as the Heidi is a knowledgable horse woman- but got over her head financially and with he amount of horses she has...maybe these efforts will get them on the right track, and over the next several months they can continue to make steps to prepare for next winter- either with the remaining horses, or all of the horses depending on the outcome.

MSP

Mar. 13, 2009, 10:50 PM

Um... 20 year old young woman. No health insurance, no money, no job, no family... and a fairly serious head injury. She *did* go to MA, and that was because her NH social worker told her that she had no chance of getting any rehab in NH, so she should go to MA. NH washed their hands of her. The delay in care because of having to move and wait to qualify for Medicaid made her ultimate outcome much worse -- full dependency on the state, versus what could have been a full recovery if she'd been able to get into rehab promptly.

YOU try pursuing anything with a serious head injury. Have you been paying *any* attention at all to what's happening with Iraq war vets with combat related head injuries -- who are guaranteed care by the VA but don't necessarily get it?

Was she a ward of the state? Because I haven't heard of too many people that at age 20 know not a single person and have no family what so ever. Usually what happens is friends and family have fund raisers to pay the cost of treatment. Now if she was a ward of the state, say mentally handicap and abandoned by her parents then I would not be surprised. Even in states where benefits exist with out an advocate they won't knock on your door to help you.

I don't get what Vets have to do with NH, wouldn't that be a problem across the country? And no I don't follow it, sorry too busy working full time, caring for 24 animals, two kids (one autistic), a diabetic husband and desperately trying to stay on top of our shrinking liberties and growing government. Oh and that job, it pays for our health insurance that pays our Dr. bills. You know, so our neighbors don't have to!

Comes back to individual responsibility which is probably lacking in the folks that this thread is about.

How and why did they amass so many horses if they just moved their from CO?

Why wouldn't they build a barn first then start the horse collection?

I don't remember reading it but were they served with a warrant? If they were I don't see why they are claiming the horses have been "stolen" from them.

I am all for individual rights a but only if you don't cause harm to another, human or animal! You must feed and care for your property!;)

Ambrey

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:01 PM

Was she a ward of the state? Because I haven't heard of too many people that at age 20 know not a single person and have no family what so ever. Usually what happens is friends and family have fund raisers to pay the cost of treatment. Now if she was a ward of the state, say mentally handicap and abandoned by her parents then I would not be surprised. Even in states where benefits exist with out an advocate they won't knock on your door to help you.

No, that's not what usually happens. What usually happens is that any person with no assets gets their hospital care paid for by the state. When you arrive, critically injured, at a hospital a social worker will come discuss it with you.

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:03 PM

Well- they moved horses from Colorado- I think they built something of a shelter, but not large enough for all of the horses on the property. In NH SPCA agents are not police officers- so they must have police and a vet with them when horses are siezed. They were served with a warrant.

The owners of the horses feel that the siezing of the horses was part of an "unsettled score" with the SPCA officer- the result of an incident that happened in Nov. when the officer was videotaped even though he said he did not want to be. Owner feels officer "has it out for him" and that is why he took the horses- nothing to do with the health of the animals.

However, the owner (wife) had contacted a local shelter only a few weeks ago for help- turned over 3 horses. Also had a vet out to look at one horse who cut her leg, and at that point the vet could have noticed that the horses did not have shelter, or were not in good flesh...etc.

MistyBlue

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:26 PM

Comes back to individual responsibility which is probably lacking in the folks that this thread is about.
Exactly. :yes:

How and why did they amass so many horses if they just moved their from CO?
They had a large breeding/working farm in CO up until late 2008. According to town hall documents...their farm was foreclosed on and they took off to NH as part of the FSP with part of their stock. They left 25 horses abandoned on the property. Bought a 40-some-odd acre property in NH without equine facilities on it and built a few smaller run ins and used round pen panels in small configurations to contain the herd they brought.

Why wouldn't they build a barn first then start the horse collection?
They mentioned on another BB personally that they A) had to house the 'naked hairless apes' (themselves) first...although there was already a house there. And B) horses do not require shelter since they grow winter coats. The few smaller shelters they did make were not enough for all the horses at all and many were claimed to have been damaged by the bad winter weather. Not all pens had shelter of any type.

I don't remember reading it but were they served with a warrant? If they were I don't see why they are claiming the horses have been "stolen" from them.
The SPCA first showed up last November asking to see the property after a complaint called in that the horses had no shelter. Owners were not home, relatives or friends were. Would not allow SPCA officer on the property to look at the conditions and video taped the visit. In the video they posted the SPCA officer tells the people with the camera that the law in this state requires they have adequate shelter for all animals. Second visit was seizure recently...not enough shelters and according to one paper report 6 of the 12 seized were emaciated. Warrant was served, then sealed. Most likely due to amount of threats made. 2 vets assessed horses and conditions and removed 12, leaving 17 behind. A few weeks ago the owners did give up 3 to a rescue as they couldn't feed those 3. 2 weeks prior the owners called a vet out for an injury...the same vet was one of the two at the seizure.

I am all for individual rights a but only if you don't cause harm to another, human or animal! You must feed and care for your property!
Couldn't agree more. Live property/stock must be cared for in a humane and healthy manner. Not coddled, but cared for. Regardless of what people perceive as their personal rights. Living property is exempt from that.

:)

gloriginger

Mar. 13, 2009, 11:31 PM

Mistyblue- have you checked the NHunderground thread recently?

If not, there is a very, gosh whats the word, I suppose disturbing, discussion about horses and if they have rights. Some of the responses making my skin crawl, some very warped minds...

<3OTTB

Mar. 14, 2009, 08:43 AM

What causes me to lack sympathy for these people is that they have yet to own up and take responsiblity.

Here's a list of excuses I have come up posted by them from various places:

*horses have found their own shelter for 1000's of years and have long fur

*people left horses at their place in CO

* Steve Sprowl has a personal vendetta against them

*shelters blew down in icestorm

*stallion was skinny because it dances for the ladies

*the govt stole their horses because they are freestaters

Sheesh the cards are stacked against these poor folks:rolleyes:non of this is THEIR fault. That's actually a common thread which ties them in with every other animal abuser. So far they fit the profile.

gloriginger

Mar. 14, 2009, 08:49 AM

Here's a list of excuses I have come up posted by them from various places:

*horses have found their own shelter for 1000's of years and have long fur

*people left horses at their place in CO

* Steve Sprowl has a personal vendetta against them

*shelters blew down in icestorm

*stallion was skinny because it dances for the ladies

*the govt stole their horses because they are freestaters

Well I gather from the NHunderground their whole MO is "play the victim" and that list certainly does --but the stallion, OMG- get a clue!

<3OTTB

Mar. 14, 2009, 08:54 AM

Yup, they were dumb-arse enough to post on the youtube soap opera that they reason why the stallion was thin was because he paced a lot - dancing for the ladies.

That's NOT normal and any stallion owner knows this. Really, that's just pure torture. Stallion being teased all day by mares and he can't do anything about it? I hope he's one of the ones gone before the first raging spring heat hits the mares:o

gloriginger

Mar. 14, 2009, 09:38 AM

I just read the youtube comments-- I especially like the guy who clearly knows nothing about horses and says that the horses that weretaken were the valuable Arabians, you know the Jumpers and show horses. Redonk!

<3OTTB

Mar. 14, 2009, 10:17 AM

Yup, and don't forget the top race horses. What, you've never been to the Arabian race track in NH:winkgrin:

gloriginger

Mar. 14, 2009, 10:22 AM

Oh, and I just thought of another one...squatters with 26 horses, Holy crap that must be one big grocery cart!

867-5309

Mar. 14, 2009, 11:34 AM

What gets me is that the owners admit they were advised about the shelter laws so they built shelters THEN say that due to the ice storm, limbs broke thru the roofs of the shelters. Well duh, the ice storm WAS MONTHS AGO. So they've been non-compliant on the shelter law since Dec.

Not to mention the horses didn't have shelter.

gloriginger

Mar. 14, 2009, 11:48 AM

yes, and I don't think they had adequete shelter for the amont of horses they had on the property- it sounds like there were 2 shelters, for 26ish horses.

MSP

Mar. 14, 2009, 12:42 PM

No, that's not what usually happens. What usually happens is that any person with no assets gets their hospital care paid for by the state. When you arrive, critically injured, at a hospital a social worker will come discuss it with you.

Social medicine will never give you the best care! That's what you are talking about when someone has zero assets! Should you really expect the best?

Example. My son qualified for first step (gov paid for) therapy. It would have been 30 mins of therapy a week. Therapist said that was not enough, he needed TP, OP and speech; 1 1/2 hours a week. We skipped the state services and opted to go private. After insurance it cost us $150 a week for over a year. It nearly bankrupted us but we made it through with help from family and an understanding employer that let me work through lunches to make up my time.

Now perhaps another state would have had better services. MS is not a rich state. Neither is NH! You can't expect the greatest care if you rely 100% on state services.

Thanks MB! Sounds like these folks disregarded the law, which I always thought was a sound one. Even with a heavy winer coat I put my horses up in the barn at night and blanketed them under 20 degrees. NH winters are cold.

In December I was down the road from this farm at Charmingfare farm for a sleigh ride at night. It was 13 degrees that night and was in the single digits the night before. Nice reminder why I moved south! :winkgrin:

Ambrey

Mar. 14, 2009, 12:51 PM

Social medicine will never give you the best care! That's what you are talking about when someone has zero assets! Should you really expect the best?

Nope, but adequate. In this case, apparently it was not adequate.

barrelchick00

Mar. 14, 2009, 01:20 PM

http://blogofbile.com/2009/03/13/heidi-legal-defense-fund/

blog of bile is right!!!!

I so totally agree. I wouldn't give her a damn dime. If I give anyone money it would be to the people who took her poor horses. They deserve it.

mckulley1

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:39 AM

Does anyone have any updates?

I have been told so much disturbing information on the care of BG starting from the second she stepped foot off my farm until the raid. It is so terrible....

Ambrey

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:43 AM

Oh no, you must be beside yourself with worry. I hope you hear some good news about her soon!

<3OTTB

Mar. 15, 2009, 08:02 AM

Does anyone have any updates?

I have been told so much disturbing information on the care of BG starting from the second she stepped foot off my farm until the raid. It is so terrible....

It sure seems like that woman has a bad rep. I guess any horse person that has been to her place leaves in horror. And yet these people think it's some sort of goverment paperwork conspiracy. Are they that cruel or that clueless?? So far their defense is very self serving.

Please hang in there and know that your horse is better off being fostered.

867-5309

Mar. 15, 2009, 08:25 AM

It sure seems like that woman has a bad rep. I guess any horse person that has been to her place leaves in horror. And yet these people think it's some sort of goverment paperwork conspiracy. Are they that cruel or that clueless?? So far their defense is very self serving.

Please hang in there and know that your horse is better off being fostered.

Are you sure your particular horse IS fostered? If it's still at the farm maybe she'd sell the horse back to you- she is after all, trying to raise $ for her "defense" fund.

MistyBlue

Mar. 15, 2009, 08:51 AM

Mckulley has already contacted Heidi and was told the mare was taken:
I should add that I fully well know that BG was one of the group that was taken. I saw the thread at SE.com that Laurie put up. I called Laurie, we talked, Thank God her colt was not in the group. So I called Heidi and she told me that BG was in the group that was taken.
However...to be sure I'd still ask for a farm visit because I'm not so sure Heidi can be trusted to tell anyone the truth about anything. She could very well have said BG was taken even if she wasn't to garner more sympathy and hope for more back up by another breeder. Or because she didn't want that person to try to buy their horse back. Or to keep Mckulley from asking to come see the horse if it was still there...Mckulley would then see the conditions of the property which aren't ideal or may find a mare she sold her to be in bad condition. I wouldn't want to believe anything that comes out of Heidi's mouth. Everything is everyone else's fault...and the last interview her husband gave was ridiculous and full of blatant misinformation. They've changed their story so many times it's laughable.

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:21 PM

Now they are asking for other unfair seizure stories. They have gotten a response and sob story from the lady in NY who had 82 seized last summer.

They believe her.:rolleyes::sigh:

I blogged about it this morning and have had an unusual amount of people looking for NH animal neglect laws.

Ambrey

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:54 PM

They are birds of a feather.

Totally innocent, wonderful horse owners who were cruelly treated by animal control and had healthy horses seized.

Did she tell them about the dead horses and those who died in forster care from malnourishment, do you think?

mckulley1

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:09 PM

Where are they posting all of this?

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:57 PM

I was reading nhunderground. Someone on that site put out Creigslist ads looking for other people who felt wrongly accused by AC and they built a website with the name of the SPCA officer as its title.

There is a 22 page thread. There is nothing useful at all in there about any individual horse or your former horse. Do not bother wading through it for info on your horse.

I was just curious.

mckulley1

Mar. 15, 2009, 03:23 PM

82 horses or Arabians?

How do you get 82 horses period!!!

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 03:29 PM

There is a very long thread on it from last summer. Unfortunately, I cannot remember her exact username and its close to another user name and I do not want to say the wrong one! Gerry Tupileo?

But do a search for last summer using seized horses NY or something. Or just wait until later when someone who knows her name comes by.

But she is posting her shared "plight" of having her horses "stolen" just so AC could pay for a new barn. Cept the story does not match the facts or the stories she posted after the fact.

Its disturbing because she is either reading this BB still, or she is reading creigs list for horses.

You want Arabian seizures? Search for a thread on that in SC last summer. TX last month, FL last year, Middleburg last winter.. Midwest before that. Then people like those who read COTH have to pay for all those horses that are "stolen" because they are "valuable".

But all you FS reading here, you will not find many supporters unless you verify the fast of your other "examples".

Ambrey

Mar. 15, 2009, 03:30 PM

She ran a TB farm.

Do a google search for "Geraldine Trupia."

A Splash of Color

Mar. 15, 2009, 03:35 PM

82 horses or Arabians?

How do you get 82 horses period!!!

See Starved and neglected TB's (barn should be shut down) (http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=161483)

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 03:54 PM

Sound familiar? They were just picking on her to make money!

"I am so sorry that you are going thru this. The same thing happened to me in August....I was placed on probation in December. The SPCA and the animal rights people are completely out of control. I would love to help you in any way that I can, maybe not as much as I would like to but if you need someone to talk to that has been there please email me. I had 82 horses taken away over labor day weekend. Horses in perfect health were euthanized on the spot just to prove that they had the power to do it, horses that were scheduled for euthanasia were put down after my final plea arrangement. How bad were my horses...82 horses removed and only 2 counts against me. Its a power trip for these assholes."

MistyBlue

Mar. 15, 2009, 04:40 PM

Yeah, Gerry is still whining it up with lies on her blog:
http://norcrestfarm.blogspot.com/?zx=c2df3bd1574a0d98
EquineLaw...where is Gerry chatting it up with the FSPers? Didn't see it on the NH Underground thread.
Mckulley...the NH Underground is here, be forewarned many of the members have extremely callous attitudes towards animals where they type out that it's perfectly fine to abuse or even torture your own animals as long it doesn't bother your neighbors:
http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=17356.0

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 04:48 PM

They made up a website as if it were the personal website of someone not in anyway affiliated with the website. So I do not want to post a link. Its on page 14 of NHunderground.

That they got Gerry serves them right:)

Kementari

Mar. 15, 2009, 06:47 PM

I disagree with libertarianism, but I've known many libertarians who were normal, sane people who I was happy to have as friends or acquaintances.

THESE people are giving all those rational, reasonable people a bad name. I'm not going to go read those FS-type boards (I don't feel like raising my blood pressure today! :lol:), but I sure as heck hope that the mainstream libertarians are taking pains to distance themselves from these jerks, lest they end up tarred (unjustly) by the same brush.

Heck, I almost wish (almost ;)) the SPCA had the kind of power these people think they have. We'd have a lot fewer horses (and other animals) end up dead from abuse and neglect if only the SPCA really COULD just go out and seize animals without extensive legal process beforehand.

JSwan

Mar. 15, 2009, 07:18 PM

I disagree with libertarianism, but I've known many libertarians who were normal, sane people who I was happy to have as friends or acquaintances.

Me too.

This isn't happening in my state so I don't feel right in really commenting... just kinda happy that they're not setting up shop in my state.

One thing I have noticed is that when some people start talking about their "rights" in the extreme, they never mention responsibility.

They'll go on about their "rights" - every other phrase is "my right".

But rights don't come without responsibilities. They don't seem to get that part.

They may have a "right" to own a horse or two or twelve. But that right isn't absolute. It comes with responsibilities. Don't accept those responsibilities - and the right is taken away.

And that's how the cookie crumbles. Own a horse or two or twelve. Feed it. Care for it properly or it will be taken away and you will be punished.

Simple.

I know of cases of abuse of authority by SPCA's but I am confident in saying this case doesn't qualify.

Kementari

Mar. 15, 2009, 07:34 PM

As the saying goes, "My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins."

Very few rights are absolute (in fact, I can't think of any at the moment, but I've also had a long week and the thinking thing isn't going as well as it might :winkgrin:), in any moral or political scheme. Generally, those who claim otherwise bear watching...

If the FSers do manage to take over, maybe I'll move back to VA. If nothing else, it's warmer there! :lol:

JSwan

Mar. 15, 2009, 07:59 PM

If the FSers do manage to take over, maybe I'll move back to VA. If nothing else, it's warmer there! :lol:

We've got some property rights nuts here but I don't think they are FS'rs. Though I'm starting to wonder....

Well - they aren't "rights" here anyway. They're "rahts". :winkgrin:

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:05 PM

He speaks. . . .

"I'm finally able to sit down and read the thread here. I appreciate everyone's concerns and realize that there are still some mysteries that remain unanswered. One is the question of finances. Without getting into too much detail, Heidi and I keep our money separate. I have my company and she has her farm. She funds her farm with the sales of her horses and supplements it with her income as a programmer.

The market for top-end horses is pretty bad right now, and she has had a hard time selling her stars. However, they continue to eat. Add to that the move and temporary unemployment as she looked for a job here in New Hampshire.

It was a tough few months for her in the late fall until she landed a new job. Things are better now, but she was forced to give up a couple horses that she had rescued so someone else could feed them. That's the connection to Live and Let Live Farm.

So how does a person struggling to feed her horses come up with $20,000 for a legal retainer? My company loaned it to her against the assets of the farm: her star horses.

Once this issue is resolved, she'll have to sell some of her stock to pay back the loan."

gloriginger

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:19 PM

equinelaw

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:30 PM

Oh crap. I posted that quote and I thought it said $2k. $20K??!!!!! Dang:eek: If they hadn't left all those strange and nasty comments on my blog I would have defended them for $5K since all they have to do is comply with the law to get the horses back. $20K retainer. Snork:winkgrin::lol:

Ambrey

Mar. 16, 2009, 12:15 AM

DEAR PEOPLE. THEY HAD ARABIANS OUT IN FRIGID WEATHER WITH NO SHELTER. THAT'S WRONG. THE END.

Think that's clear enough?

<3OTTB

Mar. 16, 2009, 08:02 AM

Hey- we are being watched...;) this is a post from the NHUnderground forum-
but no one has responded - wonder why?

Here is a link to a BB that has no charity for Brian and Heidi. I do not feel qualified to respond on this horse focus BB. They seem to have vilified the victims here with out much evidence. It seems that the powers in action here do not wish us to see said evidence. Why is that?! There seems to be some incident in Colorado that has these horse people convinced of the guilt of Heidi specifically. Someone of equine interest and aware of Heidi and Brian's true reputation should post a response on this site:

http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=194174

Thatis vey interesting information that Brian posted- do you think they know the real value of Arabian horses, especially in New Hampshire? She's probably going to have to sell at least 10 horses to make up $20k...

Dear FS'ers - the horse world is VERY small - you do not know as much as we do. We are taking the higher road and NOT commenting on some things we have found out about Heidi Fredrick. This woman has a bad rap across the country. She is being ripped apart on ALL the horse boards - hello!!

She shipped horses without HC possibly putting our horses at risk.

She has no Coggins possibly putting our horses at risk.

No Shelter, horses starving, horses taken for MEDICAL reasons!!!!!!

They admit guilt when offering up excuses - take their own word for it!

We know how horses are to be kept YOU do not. We do not want to lose our rights because of people who think they can do anything. This effects us.

BTW guys - don't let a few FS radicals trick all of you. There are FS'ers who actually care for their animals and are not supporting Heidi.

Also, I wonder how the shelter building went? Let's see some pix!! I hope everyone has proper shelter.

trubandloki

Mar. 16, 2009, 10:43 AM

equinelaw

Mar. 16, 2009, 10:59 AM

Now someone has posted she BOUGHT a new horse during that time period.

To us its about animal welfare. To them its about a political philosophy. So many of them defend her because they do not know or care about animals and it is inconstant with their beliefs for the government to interfere. It is not inconsistent with their beliefs to just get all vigilantly on someone.

So while HUSBAND posted begging for $3k for a legal defense fund (and $3K is a reasonable number) now HUSBAND says he has $20K he can loan from his business to cover the legal defense? I guess they still have no interest in the horses or getting them back and just want to take this all the way to the supreme court! Because $20K of funds just lent out to someone else from a business account seems weird for a simple administrative type hearing. Can business just do that? I mean if they are not loan businesses?

I'd hate to be the poor sucker who has to do their taxes:)

These horses were not in that bad shape and are safe and just fine now. They could go back, but its probationary and the moment they screw up again the horses get gone forever.

If not for the freak show You-tube events we would all be trying to help those 200 horses in TX. Which is probably a better use of our time although far less amusing:)

Moderator 1

Mar. 16, 2009, 01:07 PM

A couple of notes:

--please keep the thread focused on horses vs. healthcare and general discussion of political belief systems

--you're welcome to discuss ongoing developments in this case, and address issues/questions re: the horses as they arise, within forum posting guidelines, but let's please avoid engaging in a war of words with another, non-horse-related forum

Thanks!
Mod 1

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 12:20 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezVG1nhUCE8

Er. . . um. . . . is that the right way to post a link??? Cause the one I copied is too long. Someone can correct it if I did it wrong:confused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezVG1nhUCE8&eurl=http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=17356.360&feature=player_embedded

But the point is. . . new fencing, barns going up, lots of horses with no blankets who look just fine, everybody has round bales, things are looking up. Those horses may be out of the tiny panel lots soon and into better digs.

Note to FS reading this: With continued effort they should get all their horses back. Now, to be clear, if you guys keep fixing things up and doing all you should and working to fix the problem we are not out to get you here on COTH. We want the horses to be healthy and happy.

If they can be healthy and happy at home, we might even be on your side if you do all your part and the horses are not returned. Do not expect it to be free. You still might have to cover board while the overflow was out so you could fix everything up, but now that we can see the actual horses and see so much effort and progress we, well some of us, might help you if they refuse to return your horses.

We would also help you if you really wanted to learn so that you do not get confused about things like health certificates and Coggin's again. It would require change and it would require knowing what you do not know, but its not us against you. We just want what is best for the horses.

If you would rather spend $20K for a legal defense that is fine. But I, for one, would rather see $20k worth of barns and care to get back what you should get back anyway. If you convince us you are going to improve, COTH can do a whole lot to help you get your animals home without lawyers.

One way to convince us it to keep posting non-drama lama, non-political vids and showing us what you have done, will do, and that you know its what you should do.

mckulley1

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:38 AM

How do these shelters help the horses left in CO?

gloriginger

Mar. 17, 2009, 08:12 AM

good. Thanks for posting that equinelaw- I am glad to see them working toward a goal- getting the shelters built- if that was Sunday no need for blankets, it was a beautiful warm day! Yeah, spring is coming. At anyrate, I am much relieved that they are putting energy into doing what is right for the horses, and I hope they continue to get the farm in order for next winter.

McKulley1- do you know for sure that horses were left in CO- they only info that I have seen about that is the minutes from the meeting- I know someone might have called the town hall about it? Just not sure we know for sure what happened other than that horses were left there after they moved (but they could have gone back for them)--also worthy to note is that Colorado has interesting laws regarding livestock- basically you can free range horses and people have to fence their horses out. I had a friend who moved to CO- her BF free ranged his horses and one of them got stuck in a cattlegard- aweful!!!!

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 11:25 AM

How do these shelters help the horses left in CO?

Did you watch the new video and look for your horse?

We don't know they left any horses in CO. They had 23 there and at some point showed up in NH with 23. They might have just left those same horses until they could bring them to NH.

mckulley1

Mar. 17, 2009, 12:10 PM

BG has been taken by the SPCA. She was certainly not on the video.

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 12:17 PM

BG has been taken by the SPCA. She was certainly not on the video.

Good. The video at least briefly showed all the horses. Close enough for a former owner to recognize anyway. Just wanted to be sure.

What steps are being taken to make sure these people upgrade their knowledge and ethics as well as their buildings. Any?

Snowflake

Mar. 17, 2009, 12:49 PM

So, by dramatic owner's account any of us owning a horse of value should be concerned about SPCA confiscation for that reason alone? I didn't know value was a sign of neglect...

Should I be worried about my lovely spotted mare who is a beginner safe packer because she's cute and <gasp!> trained? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jenn2674

Mar. 17, 2009, 12:58 PM

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 02:13 PM

So the owner is more concerned about the police enforcing laws than they are about the actual animals themselves? Do I have that right?

Notice that you can't make comments on the youtube thread anymore.

Yes. They IGNORED HER. They took HER property. They treated HER badly. They made HER sad. They made HER stand outside. SHE had never been treated so badly in HER life.

She does not mention the horses at all, just her own needs and wants and how she was not treated like a princess. And she had all that time to post her sad tale but did not bother to add the special diet needed for one of the horses taken. She was too worried about how SHE had been disrespected and treated badly. Because it was all about HER and how those big mean bullies took HER toys! *stomps foot and throw tantrum*

bile

Mar. 17, 2009, 05:10 PM

http://blogofbile.com/2009/03/13/heidi-legal-defense-fund/

blog of bile is right!!!!

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/b/bile.html

The Celtic god of light and healing, "Bel" means "shining one," or in Irish Gaelic, the name "bile" translates to "sacred tree." It is thought that the waters of Danu, the Irish All-Mother goddess, fed the oak and produced their son, The Dagda. As the Welsh Beli, he is the father of Arianrhod by Don.

If one wishes to debate the contents of the site feel free to register and comment.

I have some comments/questions regarding this situation.
1) Given the affidavit is sealed (last I heard) there is no officially known reason why the horses were taken. Unless that information has been released through back channels.
2) If overall welfare was an issue why were only 12 horses taken?
3) If it was due to fear they may have particular diseases which could be communicable why would they move them and possibly put them in contact with other, believed clean, horses?
4) Now that the working day video has been released what are peoples opinion of the horses seen? Do they look unhealthy?
5) With regard to animal rights. Please realize the many in the FSP are students of philosophy, economics, praxeology, etc. The debate going on the NHUnderground thread regarding animal rights is of no small importance. If you have a desire to understand the argument better I would recommend "Challenges to animal rights" by Ari Armstrong. (http://www.freecolorado.com/2003/11/animalrights.html) I posted the link on the NHUnderground thread too. It does a very good job of covering the issue. I can't claim it accurately represents the view of any of the FSP members but will say it closely resembles my views on the topic.
6) WRT giving libertarians a bad name. A libertarian is one who believes in the non-aggression principle. That's it. If they believe aggression, theft, fraud, involuntary actions are acceptable means to an end. At any level. They are not libertarian. They may be small government. They may be "free market." However, being libertarian is a binary thing. To advocate the use of the State in order to seize horses in a situation which no human has had their rights infringed is not a libertarian position. Therein is where the free staters and friends outrage stems.

For what it is worth: I was raised in a farm community. My family owned horses for years. Never bred but showed and had them as pets. The family also owns a farm animal and pet feed store. Have many customers who own horses, cows, emus, hogs, etc. Have been witness to SPCA seizures of emus, horses, cows, etc. I've owned/own lots of animals of all types in my life and took very good care of all of them and I'm sympathetic with the concern for the Travis' horses. Especially as an acquaintance of Brian's (don't know Heidi). That however doesn't change the face that I fundamentally disagree with the way in which the situation was handled and would prefer everyone's outrage (those for and against the Travis family) to be kept till the facts of the matter have been fully flushed out and made public. There is a lot of jumping to conclusions and it is completely unproductive to the animals and humans involved.

<3OTTB

Mar. 17, 2009, 06:13 PM

Bile -"yellow or greenish viscid alkaline fluid secreted by the liver and passed into the duodenum where it aids especially in the emulsification and absorption of fats" (webster)

I have some comments/questions regarding this situation.

1) Given the affidavit is sealed (last I heard) there is no officially known reason why the horses were taken. Unless that information has been released through back channels.

Time will tell *however* the cops did say that horses were taken because of lack of shelter and emaciation and medical reasons.

2) If overall welfare was an issue why were only 12 horses taken?
Perhaps it was the welfare of the 12 horses removed and not all horses. Other horses may have had shelter and were not emaciation. The ones on the shelter building video looked OK.

3) If it was due to fear they may have particular diseases which could be communicable why would they move them and possibly put them in contact with other, believed clean, horses?

No - They would be in QT for a min of 2 weeks. You are wrong. Many barns have separate areas to QT a horse. This includes special biosecurity measures as well as pysical separation.

You have to understand horse husbandry here. It's routine for horses new to a property to QT'd - even if there paperwork is current and they are clean.

4) Now that the working day video has been released what are peoples opinion of the horses seen? Do they look unhealthy?

Not sure if that's all 17 that the papers said were left. Overall they look fine and nothing glares out as being something that the SPCA would seize a horse for. hence why they were left.

They do not appear to be anything like fancy Arabians worth "$100,000's". Person paraded around a horse that was wearing a halter that is too big. If the horse got loose it could easily be injured. Also the woman was walking the horse on what looked like ice - very bad.

Place was very cluttered, stuff everywhere. Nice to see shelters and work being done, new fence. YAY! :)

5) With regard to animal rights. Please realize the many in the FSP are students of philosophy, economics, praxeology, etc. The debate going on the NHUnderground thread regarding animal rights is of no small importance. If you have a desire to understand the argument better I would recommend "Challenges to animal rights" by Ari Armstrong. (http://www.freecolorado.com/2003/11/animalrights.html) I posted the link on the NHUnderground thread too. It does a very good job of covering the issue. I can't claim it accurately represents the view of any of the FSP members but will say it closely resembles my views on the topic.

No horse person is for animal RIGHTS. If radical groups like PETA got there way we would not be able to own or ride horses. I tried clicking your link but it didn't work for me. I will try again later.

"students of philosophy, economics, praxeology"

We've been reading the FS forums. Some of you are very distorted in your train of thought.

6) WRT giving libertarians a bad name. A libertarian is one who believes in the non-aggression principle. That's it. If they believe aggression, theft, fraud, involuntary actions are acceptable means to an end. At any level. They are not libertarian. They may be small government. They may be "free market." However, being libertarian is a binary thing. To advocate the use of the State in order to seize horses in a situation which no human has had their rights infringed is not a libertarian position. Therein is where the free staters and friends outrage stems.

The horses had their welfare infringed on - that's enough for me. Honestly, I having been checking out the whole Libertarian thing but if they all think a horse is property and can be treated any way the owner deems then this isn't for me.

If it were up to us horse people we would get all vigilante on those who don't care for horses :D

For what it is worth: I was raised in a farm community. My family owned horses for years. Never bred but showed and had them as pets. The family also owns a farm animal and pet feed store. Have many customers who own horses, cows, emus, hogs, etc. Have been witness to SPCA seizures of emus, horses, cows, etc. I've owned/own lots of animals of all types in my life and took very good care of all of them and I'm sympathetic with the concern for the Travis' horses. Especially as an acquaintance of Brian's (don't know Heidi). That however doesn't change the face that I fundamentally disagree with the way in which the situation was handled and would prefer everyone's outrage (those for and against the Travis family) to be kept till the facts of the matter have been fully flushed out and made public. There is a lot of jumping to conclusions and it is completely unproductive to the animals and humans involved.[/QUOTE]

How else do you suggest to prevent horses from starving to death?

usaully the the time the SPCA comes it's too late. They come before something actually dies and all of the sudden the infringed upon the rights of the owners.

We know they were investigated at least one time before.

I've yet to witness an unwarranted SPCA bust of horses. I've only see the opposite. I do think their goal should be on education and helping owner's who own up to their faults.

I agree.........let's wait till the facts all come out then we will know why the horses were taken. :winkgrin:

jeta

Mar. 17, 2009, 06:14 PM

While it is nice of their friends and neighbors to rally and help improve the living conditions of the horses, I can't help but wonder why it took such a drastic event to get these people to realize that they were not adaquately housing their animals and seek help.....

And I hate to add a bee to the bonnet here, but I certainly hope they got proper permits for the buildings.....Depending on the zoning laws in that area, they may be spinning their wheels in the mud a bit....I have seen newly built buildings have to be torn down if they don't meet code.....

Just food for thought.....

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 06:43 PM

Hi Bile,
Welcome to COTH!

The paper work is something all horses have to have at all times in all states. In some states its just for moving the horses or showing them, in others its once a year or else.

The actual disease is rare. Its rare because of all the paperwork. It is spread by biting flies. Its not fly season yet. But even though most of us have never seen a horse with EIA, we all know any show horse or horse moving or any horse at all in some states have to have its Coggin's test. If you do not know that you have never shown or raced. Ever. So we doubt either her word or her knowledge. Same for going across state lines. Not valuable animals at all. Not show or race horses. Or else she knew and is lying baout not knowing.

I have been reading the thread on NHunderground. It is now moving into a slaughter debate. Ha ha ha ha ha! Karma.

We do think it great you guys are all pulling together to help her get her horses back. I think she needs to learn more about proper management. No telling what the NHSPCA will think, but all that work goes a long way into showing personal responsibility and an intention to improve.

But be careful. I bad horse-person is the worst kind of person there is. They can make you believe anything they say, get all your time, money, effort, whatever and leave you in the dust the moment the truth comes out.

On that website you guys built posting other stories about wrongfully accused people? You got a big guilty one spinning tales. And they are falling for her story. The website itself is high-school, not cool.

The horses should come back if they play by the rules. We know you guys do not like rules, but you have not gotten rid of the rules yet so you have to play by them. If she chooses not to play by the rules we cannot help. But if she plays by the rules, does everything to get the horses well cared for, either admits she knows nothing or admits she knows but ran out of money or needed help, we can be a great group of people who do help.

And we know stuff. And we are not gonna tell you how.:)

No talk of politics or philosophy. Our Mods asked us once nicely to talk about horses only. This is a horse board only. We love our Mods and listen to them. Except on slaughter threads were we just go nuts.

gloriginger

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:26 PM

6) WRT giving libertarians a bad name. A libertarian is one who believes in the non-aggression principle. That's it. If they believe aggression, theft, fraud, involuntary actions are acceptable means to an end. At any level. They are not libertarian. They may be small government. They may be "free market." However, being libertarian is a binary thing. To advocate the use of the State in order to seize horses in a situation which no human has had their rights infringed is not a libertarian position. Therein is where the free staters and friends outrage stems.

I'm not going to comment on your other questions because my friends did a nice job- except to say that there was one horse in the video- a dark brown/black horse that looked a bit on the thin side...certainly not my ideal horse keeping situation, but I understand the enormous task of moving cross country- and that it does take a great deal of time to get settled...

But I did want to comment on the above- not on what you have said, but from a horse owner's perspective. In reading the thread on NHunderground (you all really should be a bit more creative with your naming...) it seems that there is also a misperception of horse owners. As OTTB stated- most horse owners actually are not for animal rights- they are for animal welfare. Many horse owners are actually pro horse slaughter, but against the way that horses are treated on route to slaughter houses and at the actual slaughter houses. There was a time when there were local slaughter houses and sick/older horses could be brought there and killed instantly, painlessly. Now all of those places have closed, and horses are often transported thousands of miles in vehicles not designed for them, often braking a leg or suffering a gashing wound, only to be stuck in a pen waiting for their death.

What you would find, if you stuck around and got to know the people here, is that most of us view slaughter as a neccessary evil in that without the option- horses starve, horses are abandonded or dumped at someone elses property...there is a fate much worse than death. Most horse owners are very organic in their thinking- very in touch with the earth and pragmatic in their appoach to horse keeping and life in general. We are a very passionate and opinionated bunch-who care very deeply about animals. If you have ever looked in the eyes of a horse who has given up their fight to live, watched life drain from their eyes and held their head in your lap and watched their emmaciated, feces caked body exhale for the last time, all this just hours after you were finally able to purchase the animal from their irresponsible owners, you would understand why when we hear that a horse, or horses were taken before it was too late- we celebrate.

In closing I want you to know that I am pulling for Heidi and Brian- hope they are able to build their shelters do what needs to be done to provide proper care for their horses get their horses back that were siezed and start their new life in New Hampshire.

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:36 PM

You mean the one with the head and neck?

I am not sure if that horse was thin, just poorly bred and fugly, or what I really think is that he was starved as an even younger horse and has the classic stunted growth symptoms. Like a year ago he might have been much, much thinner.

He is at an awkward age, looks like a yearling or long yearling, so maybe he will grow into that head and neck and other mis-matched parts, but if he is not a young horse he has certainly been starved in is past by someone and is no valuable show horse.

<3OTTB

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:50 PM

I agree about the stunted look as well:(

As some of us have mentioned - we only care about the horses and are happy to see things are being done to correct this situation.

cerebralfish

Mar. 17, 2009, 08:19 PM

My horses and I have been here in NH (Hollis) since 1985 and until now I thought I was getting real news. This guy is the best thing in NH news since ... well ... ever: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yud_fnLd5s&feature=channel_page
This is very settling and reassuring to me. Time to stand up I say!:

eek:

I live in the neighborhood on the same road as this tinfoil hat wearing yahoo from Colorado. He and his son walk about their property, and down the road, and on to other properties wearing their guns. I drive by this dump of a property they call a "farm" twice a day, to and from work. He had 29 horses on 40 acres of wooded property. There is no space for these horses to run, and we rarely see them being run anywhere. There are junk cars everywhere and scrap metal, so it's no wonder one of the horses got gashed and needed a vet. It's a dump. It's a junkyard with horses. It's coming to be spring, it's getting warmer, and I can smell the stench of the animals from my place. Don't get me wrong, I love animals, I'm used to the horses on my street, and there are many farms on this road. All of the folks up here who have horses ( other than Brian and Heidi) take proper care of the animals, and the rest of us who don't have horses enjoy their company from the road. When the horses came to the property, they were loaded off a school bus. They looked a bit thin, and they were very young horses and some mares. As time went on, They looked bad, thin, uncared for, and no shelter for them. neighbors began to get concerned, and the authorities came to check it out. This property is on the town line between Raymond and Candia, so now he has pizzed off neighbors in 2 towns. The dude is a nutter who thinks he can walk into the local bank and town offices wearing a sidearm. he had a modular home placed on the property with no permits to do so. He dug his own septic with no permits or plans. he really doesn't give a rats behind about his neighbors or his animals for that matter. he is an attention seeking wh**e. You folks on this forum really need to know that the authorities did what they did for good reason. I really hope they run him and his drama queen wife out on the same rail they ran out of Colorado on. I pity the poor state that gets these fools next.

gloriginger

Mar. 17, 2009, 08:53 PM

You mean the one with the head and neck?

oh- well they all had heads and necks :lol:...sorry- yes, and watching it again I guess thats what it is, ewe necked, funky looking black horse in the "corral" with the horse with it's head through the gate - poor creature. Anyway, somethings just NQR with that horse- don't think age will fix that conformation...

gloriginger

Mar. 17, 2009, 09:18 PM

When the horses came to the property, they were loaded off a school bus.

:no::no::no::no::no:

all the way from Colorado? oy vey.

barrelchick00

Mar. 17, 2009, 09:35 PM

When I watched the video with the horses in it and I saw the black/ bay arab your talking about. You were right it was just poorly bred. my sister in law has arabs and I've learned a lot about them through her. I showed her the video and she agreed it was poor breeding. She said the colt looked good as did the other bay. I too am glad to see that the horses that were left are looking good and that they are doing stuff to improve the farm.

MistyBlue

Mar. 17, 2009, 10:22 PM

Welcome Bile...and thanks for the explanation of your screen name. Not being Irish I was assuming it was the type of bile one gets when dry heaving. :winkgrin: Had no idea it meant something decidedly more tasteful in Irish.

Many of us are glad to see FSPers popping in from NH Underground. I have noticed that your posts have been less vitriolic than some of the others on there.

I have some comments/questions regarding this situation.
1) Given the affidavit is sealed (last I heard) there is no officially known reason why the horses were taken. Unless that information has been released through back channels.
The police were quoted in print on some reasons why horses were taken. Also the horse folk population might be enormous...but it's also small in it's enormity if that makes sense. Word gets around at the speed of lightening when there are mistreatment raids. There are many horse owners in that neck of the woods that have eyes and have seen what's been going on. There are folks at the places the horses may/may not be fostered. Word travels fast.
2) If overall welfare was an issue why were only 12 horses taken?
Most likely due to which ones were eihter 1) at the most risk 2) in the worst perceived condition 3) weren't able to access shelter 4) as many as the SPCA thought they could handle at the time
3) If it was due to fear they may have particular diseases which could be communicable why would they move them and possibly put them in contact with other, believed clean, horses?
As stated earlier...it's an insect borne disease. The type of flies capable of carrying it aren't viable yet. It is one of the most commonly known facts to anyone who owns horses that Coggins (Coggins in the test for EIA)is 100% necessary to travel with horses, cross state lines, show, race, etc. One of the reasons Heidi is being disbelieved by so many is her statements that they didn't know Coggins were necessary. That's impossible to not know that if she ever has shown or raced or sold out of state horses. Rabies is also necessary and can only be done by a licensed vet.
4) Now that the working day video has been released what are peoples opinion of the horses seen? Do they look unhealthy?
I was thrilled to see the video. More thrilled to see the horses shown seem to be in decent condition. Lovely to see the community helping one another. Got a giggle out of the small boy getting stuck in the mid and disliking his cold that's now gone.
5) With regard to animal rights. Please realize the many in the FSP are students of philosophy, economics, praxeology, etc. The debate going on the NHUnderground thread regarding animal rights is of no small importance. If you have a desire to understand the argument better I would recommend "Challenges to animal rights" by Ari Armstrong. (http://www.freecolorado.com/2003/11/animalrights.html) I posted the link on the NHUnderground thread too. It does a very good job of covering the issue. I can't claim it accurately represents the view of any of the FSP members but will say it closely resembles my views on the topic.
The amount of us on this BB and the amount of the equine community that believes in Animal Rights runs about 1/100. The vast majority of us are concerned with Animal Welfare. And that welfare if left to the individuals 100% causes massive concerns. Property rights and animal rights aren't apples to apples. They aren't even apples to oranges. They're more apples to xylaphones. But be assured most of us think Animal Rights are ridiculous. Animals are indeed property. But living property does fall under welfare issues. If they want to eat their horses, they're more than welcome to. If they want to neglect them to the extent as defined by law (that was voted in by the majority and I hope the FSPers still believe in majority voting) then that's not acceptable. They can shoot the horses, dress them and stack them in the freezer. They cannot starve the horses, torture the horses, abuse the horses, etc. They don't have to provide them with sleep number beds and valet service. They do have to provide the minimum feed and shelter. And to protect the neighbors' property...they HAVE to test for communicable diseases. Because if I were a neighbor MY property rights would be trampled on if their horses carry EIA and a fly carried it from their property to mine and beyond. Not having a coggins done can decimate an entire state of horses before it's caught. It might be rare, but it's deadly as sin and travels fast. They know this and they knnow the law. There's no acceptable reason to not know this.

This is rather silly. No one is justifying 'mistreating' animals under any guise. Either animals have rights or they do not. Either they are property or not. If they are owned, are property, then you have no justification for agressing against owners for what they do with their living property. You may however ostracize them, refuse them business, etc. If you are arguing that animals have rights and therefore can not be owned or be property you must be consistent. All meat eaters, butchers, slaughterhouses, even pet owners are morally and in some cases criminally responsible for their killing and enslavement or imprisonment of animals. If only some animals have rights that needs to be discussed also and some consistent method of determining who/what has rights needs to be created. I have owned everything from fish to horses my entire life. I loved them all dearly. That does not negate my belief that fundamentally they are property unless it can be shown they are deserving of rights as extended to humans.

The red comments: Animal welfare covers this. It's not animal rights at all...animals are property. Not all property is created equal. A horse is not a toaster is not a bazooka. You can do whatever you like with your toaster on your own property. But a horse is a living thing and the majority has voted that while people have the RIGHT to own one...that right comes with something some people don't seem to want: The RESPONSIBILITY to care for it in a humane way in regards to it's welfare. You don't have to keep it to MY standards...which is why there are majority voted laws on the minimum standards of care in each state. The laws were put into place *because* there were too many people abusing and neglecting their animals. By removing the laws due to property rights...trespassing or viewing Living Stock as inanimate...you remove what the majority wanted in that state and create a haven for people who actually enjoy harming animals. NH will become a haven for them...and don't think they won't come in droves. NH doesn't want that, neither do you. Worry about the domino effect and think long range here. Why move into a state and then try to force the majority to then put up with something caring kind folks do not want? That makes the FSP movement a lot less desirable. Kittens are cuter than guns...the general public might ignore firearm issues but they won't ignore animal welfare issues. Kittens and ponies make good press. Think this through. (FWIW...I'm pro firearms. I'm a licensed forearms instructor)
The green statements: Ostracizing an animal abuser does nothing for the animals.
For many of us our main point is: Do not muck with animal welfare by trying to hide behind property rights. It will open a can of worms that you and the rest of us aren't willing or capable of dealing with. Many of us do agree with property rights...and property rights are 100% inviolable AS LONG AS each person accepts the responsibility that goes with those rights.
And there is more to property rights than just not allowing people to trespass. Some of the things on the Travis/Fredrick property will affect their neighbors' property rights and they don't have the right to do that even according to the FSP movement. Having untested horses is one of them. They're going to want to start using manure control...the flies in summer will be horrendous for them and their neighbors in a few weeks. If they did not perk test and hole test for a septic they can and most likely will affect the water table and area wells...poisoning the neighbors encroaches on their property rights. As you can see...there is more to property rights other than just not allowing trespass.
being good neighbors goes a long way to changing the FSP from Freak Staters to Free Staters. You don't have to live in each others' pockets or be intrusive...but you should consider everyone's quiet enjoyment rights to their properties as well as their right not to trespass on their property. Free Staters are fine and have some pretty interesting ideas...but some of the views being expressed make it clear why some call them Freak instead of Free. I hemmed and hawed about joining that BB to discuss aspects of this case and because I found a few other topics and threads there I thought would be interesting to learn more about or debate but considering how some get their points across I'm a tad leery of having my user name show up in a Google search on that forum. Which is a shame in a way.

MistyBlue

Mar. 17, 2009, 10:23 PM

OKay...just one more comment...SORRY for being so darned wordy tonight folks! :winkgrin:

mckulley1

Mar. 17, 2009, 11:28 PM

I'm sorry, did someone say that the horses were transported from CO to NH in a SCHOOL BUS????

equinelaw

Mar. 17, 2009, 11:40 PM

Yep. I guess that big yellow bus in the videos? Its a school bus. They did seem mighty impressed with the rigs used to rescue the horses. Maybe they have never seen a real horse trailer before?

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 08:28 AM

I'm not Irish either but when that time came to choose an online handle years ago I was reading an encyclopedia of gods and chose Bile.

I won't got into the property rights issue as it has been said that's a no-no here. However, briefly, "all property is not created equal" is what is being debated here. If an animal does not have rights and we all agree here that humans do, than it is illegitimate to infringe on the rights of one person to "protect" the welfare of their property. The question was brought up as to how to deal with this situation without involving the State. There are plenty of ways as MistyBlue quoted me from NHUnderground. From ostracism to offering to buy them. Ostracism is a means to prevent the act in the future. An incentive to either treat them better or sell them. The US culture has lost much of it's understanding of the strength of ostracism though I see it is strong in the horse community though you may not notice it. The way in which this has all spread is proof enough for me that if you all were truly concerned and motivated appropriately you could have handled this in a much less offensive manner. To speak toward the comments about law... please understand that many in the FSP are anarchists. Usually of the anarcho-capitalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism) ilk. Or some would prefer voluntarist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntaryism)or free marketeer. Myself included. The statement of intent says that the MAXIMUM role of government is the protection of people and property. We disagree fundamentally with the idea of aggression as a means to an end. That absolutely means majority rule (involuntary entered into). Yes, there is much more to property rights than trespassing. Trespassing is not is what is at issue here. The issue is the raid, the disarming of the family during the raid, the confiscation outright of the horses without true warning or even the following of their laws. The secrecy. The (I think) obvious fact that there were personal issues between Sprowl and Brian (and Cooper). Rights require no responsibility. No obligation. They are negative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_rights) in nature. OK... I could go on forever. If you want to discuss these things further feel free to contact me personally (http://blogofbile.com/contact) or head over to NHUnderground. I understand that many of them their appear to be hot heads. Some are and I often get into debates regarding their actions... HOWEVER... many of those horse owners who have responded to this situation have been just as vitriolic and rather than debate have resorted to ad hominem attacks.

I have to run but if you all haven't seen there are new videos up regarding all this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VadrDCV0YE8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb68e3UqS9c

Brian says that 6 of the horses are to be given back provided the shelters are fine. It seems that obviously they (that 6) at least were not taken for health reasons (being underfed and such). I point that out only because many people have claimed in hyperbolic terms that these horses were in horrible condition. It seems not.

If someone could if they know... what is the typical response to a single or few instances of neglect or abuse? In SPCA seizures I've witnessed all animals were forfeit when single cases arise and proven. Is that not the case in NH or are the horse simply not in that bad a shape?

And yes they were moved in converted school buses. They had a lot of horses to move. I don't know what the conversion involved but given the trailers I've used or seen in the past I don't see how a school bus divided up would be much different.

gloriginger

Mar. 18, 2009, 09:08 AM

so assuming that the land and home was not purchased outright, as in there is a mortgage on the property- the bank owns the land, and is therefore the property owner...Just sayin'

Converted school bus, I think that explains the scope of this situation, woowzers.

Gloriginger out.

cerebralfish

Mar. 18, 2009, 09:35 AM

JSwan

Mar. 18, 2009, 10:23 AM

I haven't seen the school bus (I'm trying to stay away from the FS arguments here)

But a school bus could be fitted to safely transport livestock. It would really not be any different than a van - and lots of folks use vans.

If they crammed horses into a regular school bus and just took the seats out- well - that's not what I'm referring to of course.

But the load capacity, frame, axles, engine, floor, tranny - probably perfectly acceptable and much safer than a horse trailer. IF retrofitted properly.

It ain't transporting the Partridge Family.

I don't really care who Bile or anyone else is... but it's well settled that property rights are NOT absolute. Folks can harp all they want about which right trumps which - but they're simply not absolute and never have been.

Whether it is rights in real property or rights in personal property. Rights conflict, overlap, and complement.

One does not have the right to neglect or harm an animal. With rights, come responsibilities. If a person does not exercise good judgment and accept personal responsibility - the right is taken away.

That is how a society functions.

An anarchist would disagree - but the fact they are able to express their disagreement is due to the fact that society exists in the first place.

And in today's society - one does not have the right to harm or neglect an animal. A very basic standard is set - and it is a reasonable one.

I do know of cases of abuse by SPCA's but from what I have read of this case - the government is not abusing its authority.

Don't drink the kool-aid - it tastes funny.

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 10:26 AM

However, briefly, "all property is not created equal" is what is being debated here. If an animal does not have rights and we all agree here that humans do, than it is illegitimate to infringe on the rights of one person to "protect" the welfare of their property.

The point is the majority of each states' citizens voted on having animal welfare laws in place. A majority vote stating that animals *are* indeed property and that living property is not to be considered on an equal plane with non-living property. I've read that the FSPers are claiming they don't want to "take over the state" yet here's a bunch claiming they want the laws that the majority of lifelong residents of this state voted into effect should be null and void because the small handful of very loud FSPers want it changed. So you have two issues at play here:
1) FSPers do indeed look like they want their minority beliefs forced onto the majority.
2) The FSPers believe that the welfare of living things that cannot protect themselves legally is not as important as being considered unfeeling inanimate objects.

The question was brought up as to how to deal with this situation without involving the State. There are plenty of ways as MistyBlue quoted me from NHUnderground. From ostracism to offering to buy them. Ostracism is a means to prevent the act in the future. An incentive to either treat them better or sell them. The US culture has lost much of it's understanding of the strength of ostracism though I see it is strong in the horse community though you may not notice it. The way in which this has all spread is proof enough for me that if you all were truly concerned and motivated appropriately you could have handled this in a much less offensive manner

So your proposed remedy for abuse, neglect, torture or whatever other non-welfare law breaking offense is that the community ostracizes these folks? Or that if the public sees an abused or neglected animal...to reward the abuser by giving them money for their animals? Seriously? Was *any* research done on this at all?
1) Let's look at ostracizing: That was the remedy until a handful of decades ago. That remedy worked so badly for so long that the general public in MASS MAJORITY fought to have laws passed to offer at least a minimal standard of care put into place. It was fixed because it didn't work. Nobody changed the status of animals from property to rights...the MASS MAJORITY also fought having that happen. Thus welfare came into being. Living property being distinguished as the same but apart from other property. A community of people is judged by certain things...one of them being how they care for their animals. The FSP is not being judged kindly by other animal lovers at this time due to a few very loud, very narrowly informed, very fanatic members. The general public is taking notice in large numbers too now. By fighting to get animals taken off welfare laws you're not only pissing off many of your fellow FSPers but the general public, the farmers, the pet owners and all those who might not have pets but will object heavily to the idea that if someone decides to set puppies on fire for sh*ts and giggles should only be ostracized by the public.
BTW...how does the word get out to the public without newspaper reports and police reports on the abuse or neglect? Do they have to start hoping that the FSPers will see the abuse and then look up the NH Underground forum to find out who needs to be ostracized this week?
2) Let's look at purchasing the animals from the neglector or abuser: We should monetarily reward them for repugnant behavior? Really? There's three *massive* problems with that pie-in-the-sky idea. The abuser can refuse to sell the animal. Then what? Too bad, so sad Blaze the horsie? The second problem...you'll create quite a few serial abusers/neglectors. Buy an animal from them on the sole reason to get it out of the hands of someone cruel or ignorant and you've rewarded them. So they go out and get another one, abuse it as publicly as possible and wait to ransom it off for more money. They'll smarten up and want more and more for each animal. "Want me to stop starving it/beating it? Now it's going to cost you $500 for this dog or I'll nail it's paw to the floor tonight!" Don't think that will happen? How many animal abuse calls have you been out on? Do me a favor, look up Petabuse.com and pick any state and look at the crimes against animals listed there. Be prepared to read for a damned long time. And if you do care for animals and their welfare...be prepared to be disheartened and even sickened. Problem number three...since there's no way to get the word out to thousands of people on animal abuse or neglect if there's no laws against it...what if the few who know just can't afford to pay whatever price the owner wants for it? It's up to the people who care to what? Take extra jobs in case they have to ransom beaten or starved animals from their owners?

The statement of intent says that the MAXIMUM role of government is the protection of people and property.
Animal welfare laws ARE for the protection of living property. And FWIW...there's been more than one FSPer being very verbal on equine BBs claiming FSPers are being insulted by being called anarchists. That FSPers aren't anarchists and it's an insult to call them that. :confused:

That absolutely means majority rule (involuntary entered into). Yes, there is much more to property rights than trespassing. Trespassing is not is what is at issue here. The issue is the raid, the disarming of the family during the raid, the confiscation outright of the horses without true warning or even the following of their laws.
The family was disarmed. Because SANE people do not wear firearms on their own property to protect it against law enforcement. Law enforcement is just that...enforcing the laws that the majority ruled for. Unfortunately for some FSPers they don't agree with that majority. And to want the majority changed for a select few is dictatorship...which *definitely* infringes on everyone else's rights for majority rule. They had true warning BTW. And it is up to the person owning livestock (in a supposedly professional sense too) when moving into a state to look up all the laws and restrictions pertaining to those animals. It is not up to the state to have a welcoming party present handing out information packets at their front door. Or I should say street since if they knock on the front door to say welcome they'll be met with firearms I'm guessing. If you come to someone else's state...you learn their rules. All of us do this just to go show in another state for a day or week. They didn't do this when relocating to live? Or did they just assume they wouldn't like the laws so didn't read them on purpose? They are easily found online and they do seem to enjoy being online.
And it's been stated numerous times: There is NO WAY on God's green earth Heidi did not know about having Coggins done to cross state lines. No way. Not possible. The only thing possible is that she either lied about not knowing or she lied about these being show horses, race horses or sales horses. Because you can't do those things without current Coggins tests.

Does their right to property mean they can not vaccinate for diseases or test for diseases and put everyones' property within a few miles' radius at risk?
How about the possibility that they dug their own septic or are keeping extra living quarters on their property? Does their right to property trump their neighbors' rights to their property being safe simply because they're FSPers? Can the town hall come inspect and test their septic and wells? Or is that unwarranted trespass? Would it matter that without proper perk and hole testing done before any well or septic is put in...and that those things need to be installed by a licensed pro...puts everyone within a certain radius in danger of their health due to ground water and well infiltration? I have horses...I have neighbors. My well and septic are set so as not to infringe on their property rights and all manure on my property is handled and located in a way so as not to infiltrate on my neighbors. It will not contaminate their wells, make them sick, stink up their property or brign them more flies. Because that infringes on their property right to quiet and safe enjoyment.

jeta

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:06 AM

Rights require no responsibility. No obligation.

Between all the lines this is the statement that just makes me shake my head and hope this movement never has any real impact....The world is not a perfect place, but imagine if this one tenet was adopted by all....

So you have the right to own an animal, but you are exempt from the RESPONSIBILITY of being decent human beings in regard to the treatment of that animal and provide humane life supporting care? You are exempt of the OBLIGATION to keep that animal healthy and free from contagious diseases that affect the bigger community within which you live?

Just trying to understand your position here....

JSwan

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:23 AM

<3OTTB

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:35 AM

There was a warrant. Since Heidi and Travis like to show everything off why haven't we gotten a chance to see the warrant said? Perhaps we would take them more serious if we saw that the warrant said "steve sprowl doesn't like brian". But we suspect it doesn't say that.

Ambrey

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:36 AM

Lucky for the animals of the world that that particular "right" isn't part of the constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court, nor is it ever likely to be. Animal cruelty laws are here to stay.

mckulley1

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:47 AM

Wow.....shaking head....

If you want to live in a society with others, you'd better get a grip.

If you don't, I can suggest a sand dune in the ME where your train of thought would be better suited. Or, if you prefer, a scrub pile in South Africa that has a recent opening for occupants.....

Do you get it? Do you see what happens to humanity when people believe they are exempt from the rules?

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 12:51 PM

Top 10 ways you can tell if you are a hoarder.

1) Some horses were skinny because they were old. Old horses are skinny.
2) some were skinny because they were nursing.
3) They are all crammed into little lots because the crappy fence fell down and we did not fix it our build a new one.
4) We cannot afford grain every day. We feed it when we can get it. Sometimes several times a week.
5) We cannot afford vet care. We expect a Vet to just hand over drugs without ever seeing our horses or meeting us.
6) Its not our fault we can't find hay or afford grain. We planned on feeding them enough when we could do that without having to give up our own luxuries.
7) We did not bother to read the NH building codes so we could build safe shelters. We just figured NH was just like CO. Not our fault.
8) As we stand in front of our stunted horses that were malnourished in the past we do not even know it shows.
9) We do not even know some of them are still skinny, but we couldn't afford grain this month so oh well.
10) We understand puppy mills are bad, but do not realize we are a puppy mill for horses. We can't feed what we have, but we still breed and buy more horses.

That poor poor lawyer. I'll bet he is returning that retainer right now. His clients just made a full confession on the internet and thought excuses were a defense.

FUGLY??? Take it from here. . . . .

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:12 PM

Was surprised over the puppy mill analogy they used in the video. because on the NH Underground site some members posted videos of puppy mill owners who were shut down by the SPCA and using the videos of the SPCA being evil. Because they were a Stossal report from TV...which was later debunked as poor reporting.
But yes...the latest video part one and two aren't of any help to the owners at all. All they accomplish is cementing the facts right from the horse owner's mouth...and the facts aren't pretty.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:22 PM

I think Fugly can explain it them and link to her older posts so they understand. They honestly do not get it at all. I have one e-mailing me and the best thing I can do is to tell him to read fulgy, but thats a lot of reading. Can you ask her to do a post?

She can sum it up better then I and I am starting to feel sorry for all those nice people trying to help.

And I may have volunteered you to educate them on proper horse care. Not the owners, but their fiends who are now suddenly in the horse rescue biz and do not even know it yet. Because they are feeding building, sheltering and caring for the horses now. One day soon that big yellow bus will take off in the middle of the night and they need to know how to get homes for 2 or so worthless stunted arabs:cry: K?:winkgrin:

gloriginger

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:22 PM

ok, just watched the vid's- more horses with the bad ewe neck- yikes.

Pretty self detructive- "sometimes we get behind" "Horses have different metabolisms" yeah- they do my ARABIAN mare is a hard keeper- especially in the winter- and she gets extra grain and added fat in her food to help her get through the winter along with high quality second cut hay. And she has a big heavy weight turnout blanket (AKA waterproof), not flimsy stable sheets- think 300-400 grams of fill. we had a cold snap in NH where it was
-15 in the morning at my house for three days!

That place looks like a total dump. There is one point where they show two horses in a pen and they barely have enought room to move around without stepping on each other.

Oh boy, yup your right, only a matter of time before this in on Fugly...

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:23 PM

Being on fugly would be a good thing. She is a great writer and has the HTML skills to get the point across in 1 page or less.

gloriginger

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:28 PM

yup - I agree.

barrelchick00

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:30 PM

[QUOTE=equinelaw;3957072]Top 10 ways you can tell if you are a hoarder.

1) Some horses were skinny because they were old. Old horses are skinny.
2) some were skinny because they were nursing.
3) They are all crammed into little lots because the crappy fence fell down and we did not fix it our build a new one.
4) We cannot afford grain every day. We feed it when we can get it. Sometimes several times a week. (this one is my fave)
5) We cannot afford vet care. We expect a Vet to just hand over drugs without ever seeing our horses or meeting us.
6) Its not our fault we can't find hay or afford grain. We planned on feeding them enough when we could do that without having to give up our own luxuries.
7) We did not bother to read the NH building codes so we could build safe shelters. We just figured NH was just like CO. Not our fault.
8) As we stand in front of our stunted horses that were malnourished in the past we do not even know it shows.
9) We do not even know some of them are still skinny, but we couldn't afford grain this month so oh well.
10) We understand puppy mills are bad, but do not realize we are a puppy mill for horses. We can't feed what we have, but we still breed and buy more horses.

I absolutely agree that she is a hoarder. And after watching the videos I too saw the ewe necks and see that they have managed to make their attorneys life a living hell. Maybe thats why it cost him 20k to get the attorney...:yes:
Once again I feel for the horses and hope that people learn from this situation. Yes I love my horse but she IS livestock so you must feed and maintain them with what the animal needs. Which requires blankets, grain, supplements and hay. If you have some that are "hard keepers" maybe get them away from the grain thieves? Just an idea.....

<3OTTB

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:31 PM

Yes, this is fugly worthy for sure!!! :D Complete with video footage!

the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, the wheels on the bus go round and round all through the town.

ChocoMare

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:33 PM

Rights require no responsibility. No obligation. They are negative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_rights) in nature.

Between all the lines this is the statement that just makes me shake my head and hope this movement never has any real impact....The world is not a perfect place, but imagine if this one tenet was adopted by all....

So you have the right to own an animal, but you are exempt from the RESPONSIBILITY of being decent human beings in regard to the treatment of that animal and provide humane life supporting care? You are exempt of the OBLIGATION to keep that animal healthy and free from contagious diseases that affect the bigger community within which you live?

...And you have the right to procreate/give birth but NO RESPONSIBILITY for caring for that new human being? :o :confused:

Alas, this is where "There is no right or wrong.... What's right for you is right. What's wrong for you is wrong." has brought us.

I don't care what your background or upbringing: not providing life-sustaining necessities to domestic horses that must rely on human intervention to survive properly & healthily is WRONG. Just like lying, stealing, rape, murder, etc. etc. etc. is wrong.

Oy vey :rolleyes:

<3OTTB

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:37 PM

You are right Choco, it's objective morality. Doesn't matter your beliefs, your political views, your religion. There are some things in this world that are wrong.

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 01:44 PM

Arab broodies still nursing:
http://www.bullioarabians.com.au/spawner/data/bullioarabians.com.au/46_1.jpg
http://www.animalpicturesarchive.com/Arch01/1096034668.jpg
http://portraitswithhorses.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/wilgilfoalposing.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/hanleyhorses/lace5.jpg

18 year old arab broodmare...aged and nursing:
http://www.dreamhorse.com/photos/dec/1336426.jpg
17 year old arab:
http://www.dreamhorse.com/photos/aug/1277125.jpg
23 year old arab:
http://www.dreamhorse.com/photos/feb/1358204.jpg
23 year old broodie nursing:
http://www.dreamhorse.com/photos/nov/1329281.jpg

There are many Arab folks on here who have fat healthy Arabs, broodies and all ages.
Not to mention that Arabs overall are easy keepers. Heidi mentions in the video she has at least one hard keeper...and I'm sure there's a few hard keeping Arabs out there. But considering there are at least a handful in the video who are visibly underweight even under their heavy winter coats...I'm doubting she somehow found every hard keeping Arab in the planet. They;re usually known as Air Ferns...very little feed required to keep them fat.
Arab stallions...no reason for them to be skinny. I've never seen a skinny one...too easy to keep them fat. As a matter of fact...hard to keep them from being too fat. Endurance is an extremely athletic sport for horses and the number one horse for that are Arabs. They can go a hundred miles and not drop weight. And they can't keep them in decent weight standing in tiny paddocks?
And they'd rather spend $20k on an attorney even as they're getting horses back rather than on daily grain or a barn for the horses? And what's with the $20k anyways? ON the forum they state it was loaned to them from a business specifically for attorneys...now it was barn money?
Seriously...keep the stories straight.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 02:31 PM

Those videos were so special I had to watch them again.
"They do not need much room. They are herd animal and like being close"

But then he whines about the Vet bill for a kicked horse.:)

Mmmmmaybe they do not like being that close all the time.

MSP

Mar. 18, 2009, 03:08 PM

I am almost speechless, almost! Wow, that was some video and I have to agree I would not want to try to defend it. It would take all day to hit on every flaw of logic and reason in that video so I think I will just pass on some much needed info to these people.

I have moved from NH to MS. It is your duty to learn the laws of your new state! Did you get a NH driver license, register vehicles, buy property? Then you had to learn how, what is different and what is required. It is no different for animals. So I will help by giving you a link to the laws please review and comply.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XL/435/435-mrg.htm

Treatment of Horses
Section 435:11
435:11 Similar Animals. – The term ""horse'' as used in this subdivision shall include all members of the equine species.
Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985.

Section 435:12
435:12 Proper Care. – No person shall overdrive, overwork or overload a horse in his or her care. No person shall buy, sell or exchange any horse that is unfit to be used for riding, driving, draft or reproduction purposes, unless it is for rehabilitation or slaughter. No person shall torture, beat, mutilate or abandon any horse, or aid in such abuse, or permit any horse in his or her care to be subject to abuse of any kind. Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985. 2003, 9:1, eff. April 22, 2003.

Section 435:13
435:13 Proper Feeding. – All horses shall receive roughage in proportion to their size, age, temperament and amount of work they are required to perform. Grain may also be required when roughage alone will not meet their daily nutritional requirements. All horses shall be fed on a regular daily schedule, and all food shall be clean and free from excessive moisture. All horses shall have available a sufficient quantity of fresh water to maintain hydration.
Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985. 2003, 9:1, eff. April 22, 2003.
Section 435:14
435:14 Shelter Available. – Horses shall be provided either:
I. An adequately ventilated, dry barn with stalls of sufficient size so that the horse is able to lie down, and shall be provided adequate and suitable exercise in arenas, barn yards, paddocks or pastures; or
II. A roofed shelter, with at least 3 sides from November 1 through April 15, shall be provided for horses kept in paddocks or pastures, and said horses shall not be kept tied but shall be able to move around freely.
Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985. 2003, 9:2, eff. April 22, 2003.
Section 435:15
435:15 Veterinarian Services and Probable Cause Determinations. –
I. A probable cause determination for seizing horses pursuant to a cruelty investigation shall be made only by the state veterinarian or a veterinarian licensed under the provisions of RSA 332-B. No seizing or taking of horses shall be made without a probable cause determination.
II. Pursuant to RSA 644:8, V, a veterinarian licensed to practice in the state shall be held harmless from either criminal or civil liability for any decisions made for services rendered under the provisions of this subdivision.
Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985. 2003, 9:2, eff. April 22, 2003.

Section 435:15-a
435:15-a Rulemaking. – The commissioner shall adopt rules, under RSA 541-A, relative to the care, shelter, and feeding of horses, and the enforcement of this subdivision.
Source. 2003, 9:3, eff. April 22, 2003.

Section 435:16
435:16 Penalty. – Any owner failing to comply with the provisions of this subdivision shall be notified as to the proper care of horses. Upon a second offense, the horse shall be seized and not returned until restitution for the expenses involved in the seizure is made and proof of proper care is given. Upon a third or subsequent offense, the horse shall be permanently seized. Whoever violates the provisions of this subdivision shall be guilty of a violation. Source. 1985, 72:1, eff. July 1, 1985.

Index of laws in case you need to see them as well.
http://agriculture.nh.gov/rules/index.htm

Adequate shelter is what is define under law! Having horses in round pens with no access to any shelter is not adequate under NH law!

Now after reading these laws go back and view the videos, how many violations can you spy?

mckulley1

Mar. 18, 2009, 03:11 PM

The Vet complaint really gets to me. I'm a Vet Tech...and obviously a horse owner. They complain that the Vet didn't just hand them over the meds and supplies that they needed.

I'm sorry, do you call up a doctor you've never seen before and demand drugs? NO! Because #1 You know you won't get them. and #2 Doctors have a little thing called a LICENSE that can be taken away if they don't do things properly. And one of the things they cannot do is to treat an injury requiring treatment and abios over the phone.

No doctor on this PLANET is going to risk loosing their license over Penicillin and Vet Wrap! Not to mention that if Heidi can't even properly CARE for these horses and has no idea what a Coggins is for - than the LAST thing she should be doing is giving a horse IM injections of Penicillin considering how easy it is to KILL or permanently disfigure a horse with such product.

So lets look at this. They say their bill was $226. Between what was sure to be an emergency farm call, exam, cleaning, wrapping, injection, and supplies, sounds like they paid exactly what I would expect to pay.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 03:14 PM

Its like having a new TV show to watch. This weeks episode has clues!!! How many can you find:eek::D What will they do next?

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:00 PM

Just thought you might want to know..."bile" is most likely Cooper Travis, trolling for attention to get his free stater woes out to the public via internet.

[http://blogofbile.com/tag/cooper-travis/[/URL]

Coinkidink? Nah.

I'm assuming you didn't follow that link. It's a tag on my blog. Each time I have posted regarding Cooper or his family I've tagged it as such. Google is good at picking up tags so I do so extensively to bring in traffic. If you were handy with whois you'd easily find out who I am. I am not Cooper.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:12 PM

Bile, do you understand the problems with the horse care now? Its a 24/7/365 job that does not pay and cost about $300 a month per horse right now. There is never a later. There is never an excuse.

I simply cannot believe they posted that video. If its not too late, they may want to get some professional help to teach them basic horse care. And they may want to not worry so much about making their help sign confidentiality agreements and as they should worry about it being qualified help that they will listen to and learn from.

Thanks for posting the links here so we could see for ourselves what we already suspected. Its not very shocking to find out we were right all along.

You should have been able to answer your own question. The 6 horses not being returned cannot be returned until they can be properly fed. These people cannot afford the clue needed to feed them much less the feed. That seems to be because they saved all their money for legal fees? Which I am guessing is a lie too.

They need to eat every day. Not just the easy ones.

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:19 PM

Between all the lines this is the statement that just makes me shake my head and hope this movement never has any real impact....The world is not a perfect place, but imagine if this one tenet was adopted by all....

So you have the right to own an animal, but you are exempt from the RESPONSIBILITY of being decent human beings in regard to the treatment of that animal and provide humane life supporting care? You are exempt of the OBLIGATION to keep that animal healthy and free from contagious diseases that affect the bigger community within which you live?

Just trying to understand your position here....

You all seem to expect me to cram tens of thousands of pages of philosophy, political science, rights theory, etc. into a post where I'm assumed the bad guy from the get go due to association.

There are differences between obligations, moral responsibility, etc. Rights come from within. They are absolute and innate. They are inalienable. (You can't contract yourself to be a slave... your will is nontransferable.) I have a right to my labor, my person, to the fruits of my labor. I do not have a right to healthcare or a dune buggy. Those latter things put requirements on others. I can not have a right to your life. To your labor. To claim I have obligation to an animal is to claim I've in some way contracted with it or with it's owner. A legitimate obligation, a legitimate contract, one in which force or the threat of can be used to enforce (legitimately) requires some infringement on property. Theft or damage. I agree you have a moral responsibility to care for the animal unless you hold animals to the same level as humans I do not agree you have the justification to infringe on my rights in order to enforce your moral system on me.

Again. This is an immensely deep topic and this is a terrible forum (means of communication, not this web forum) to discuss this. If individuals are honestly interested in discussing this further please read the few links regarding the topic I've posted already and contact me off list. I can recommend lots of other works. One in particular is Dr. Mary Ruwart's Healing our World. Good all around book on libertarianism.

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:24 PM

I agree - I'm done.

Bile has lived up to his screen name.

You are invited to contribute to the conversation in a more constructive and mature manner. I pointed out the origins of the handle. If you wish to bring it down to ad hominem attacks I will gladly leave you all to your devices.

Ambrey

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:28 PM

Sorry, Bile, this is a board for horse-related discussions, not a soapbox for your political commentary. If you read the forum rules, you'll find that all discussion must be horse-related.

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:31 PM

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:33 PM

Sorry, Bile, this is a board for horse-related discussions, not a soapbox for your political commentary. If you read the forum rules, you'll find that all discussion must be horse-related.

I understand that. I thought I clearly mentioned I knew that and tried to keep my responses to questions short and asked natives of this forum to contact me personally. They haven't. Please be fair.

Mav226

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:47 PM

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:51 PM

I'm not sure I understand. Where did they (the SPCA or Travis family) claim the horses were not fed?

As for legal fees. Heidi and Brian have separate businesses. When it is said that 'they' had money problems it was a reference to Heidi's horse business + her other work. Her husband at some point said that he loaned his wife the money for legal fees. I don't recall where that was said. Perhaps the Free Talk Live radio show.

The part where she says they fed grain when they could. A few times a week when it was possible. She admits the old horses, the stallion and some mares were skinny. She admits to not feeding them every day and then not understanding why they were skinny. "Just the way the are" she says. Uhhuh. And my ass is 4 feet wide because I have a really slow metabolism. It has nothing to do with the 3 pizzas I eat every night:) They needed more feed--not just when she could feed them or felt like it. The horses left are borderline thin. If they are the ones to be proud of I think the others must look pretty bad,.

If the posts since your posing the video do not answer your question then you are not looking for any answers.

He owned the property on which she was not feeding horses. He can buy feed or get in trouble with the law. He chose the law, but she said they could not afford feed. So they had the cash, they just refused to spend it on feed. His business can loan her money for her business at any time--like before the horses had to be rescued.

Did you look at Mistys pics of old and nursing mares and stallions? If you feed them enough they are not skinny. Its not just the way they get. If you do not even feed them every day of course the hard keepers will not thrive.

And the whole time they even had the money. Even when they dumped off horses at a rescue they had the money to buy feed. They had the money to fix the fence. They had the money for vet care. "we will feed them when times get better" and they had the money now and have had it.

He stood there and watched the horses starve and only stepped in when he was offended by taped over tags??? Thats worth $20K, but not feeding the starving old horses?

Its even noticed by people on your own BB. They suggested to take down the confession. I suggest they post more since we never see such a perfect example of ignorance and hoarding so well documented. It can be an educational tool for the ages.

Its is possible he just as no idea about horses, but she sure does not seem to either. They may be at the stage where they could be trusted with a goldfish or 2, but not raising horses in their backyard foal mill.

Talk about shame, they do not even have the sense to have any. The people in the video were hiding their faces from a crazy person with an ax to grind and guns. They were also turning their faces away to shun him. All these people deserve is shunning and banishment from any community that the infect.

mckulley1

Mar. 18, 2009, 04:58 PM

Bile, Lets see...where did it say they were not being fed.... (taps chin)...

Well, they have said numerous times that they were having trouble finding hay and grain. They were HAVING TROUBLE and the product of that trouble are the horses who are skinny.

What's really f-d up is that she lied to ME about buying $5000 semi tractor trailor loads of hay out of NY!!

And bought a NEW horse during this "troubled" time!!

And declined my offers of phone numbers to area grain, hay, and farriers!!!

And I have good information from people who are involved with the rescued horses that she was feeding BREWERS GRAIN to the horses! HELLO!!!! Horses are NOT ruminants! They cannot take processing such a product!

And sadly I have been told that BG was the worst of the group.... :(

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:00 PM

*crickets*

Ambrey

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:01 PM

OMG, is she OK? Have you gotten an update on her?

"Having trouble finding hay/grain" almost always means "having trouble affording hay/grain at local prices." I'd guess that hay and grain aren't cheap in NH in the winter. People who can't afford to feed their horses need to not keep them.

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:02 PM

I'm not sure I understand. Where did they (the SPCA or Travis family) claim the horses were not fed?

As for legal fees. Heidi and Brian have separate businesses. When it is said that 'they' had money problems it was a reference to Heidi's horse business + her other work. Her husband at some point said that he loaned his wife the money for legal fees. I don't recall where that was said. Perhaps the Free Talk Live radio show.

They state clearly in the video that funds are short for grain and they only get grain a few days a week right now. She states clearly in the video that she has a few that are hard keepers, a stallion that can't keep his weight up and has/had mares that can't keep their weight up when nursing. Brian states this is to be expected. It's not. The laws posted state hay isn't always enough...and anyone with more than a year's experience in horses knows this too:
435:13 Proper Feeding. – All horses shall receive roughage in proportion to their size, age, temperament and amount of work they are required to perform. Grain may also be required when roughage alone will not meet their daily nutritional requirements. All horses shall be fed on a regular daily schedule, and all food shall be clean and free from excessive moisture
When round bales are left out on bare ground and not covered...they get wet. The wetness causes mold. Mold is inedible. Moldy food is unacceptable. When the temps warm up, those same bales have a high chance of breeding botulism. That's edible...and deadly.
So they're admitting themselves in the video they knew some of their horses weren't getting enough nutrition to thrive on but didn't feed more.
Stallions aren't expected to be skinny. neither are broodmares or older horses. That's an old wive's tale only believed by the ignorant. Thousands of people on this BB alone have stallions, nursing broodies and senior horses that aren't skinny. Not stretching those facts...take a look at how many active users there are on this BB. Thousands have the same breed, same ages, same genders of horses that are in excellent weight. FWIW...the colder the weather...the more feed a horse needs to stay healthy.

If Brian is stating the $20k is coming from his business strictly for her legal fees...why is he now saying that was slated as barn money and now the big bad SPCA is preventing his horses from getting a barn?
And if funds of $20k were available all along...why not use a few bucks of that to loan to his wife when her horses were hungry and she had no feed money? Did she ask and he said no? Or did neither really care? There's money to be found for legal fees that bring in attention to the FS Movement but not for the horses hungry outside that caused the issue in the first place?

I don't know why anyone is asking questions. The only questions that get answered are ones that can be twisted into an FSP lecture.

mckulley1

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:06 PM

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:08 PM

What's really f-d up is that she lied to ME about buying $5000 semi tractor trailor loads of hay out of NY!!

And bought a NEW horse during this "troubled" time!!

And declined my offers of phone numbers to area grain, hay, and farriers!!!

McKulley has some excellent questions here. Maybe if they keep getting repeated someone will come up with an answer? Hopefully?

Is it common for FSPers to lie to get their way? Why would she state she gets shipments of $5k worth of hay from NY?
Why, if there were such money troubles, skinny horses, falling down fences, no extra turnout room, not enough shelter, couldn't find hay to buy, can't give grain more than a few days per week, were giving horses to a rescue claiming they had more than they could feed....WHY BUY ANOTHER ONE?
If they have a hard time finding feed and hay...why turn down the offer of info on where to find these things?

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:11 PM

So your proposed remedy for abuse, neglect, torture or whatever other non-welfare law breaking offense is that the community ostracizes these folks? Or that if the public sees an abused or neglected animal...to reward the abuser by giving them money for their animals? Seriously? Was *any* research done on this at all?

Yes, seriously. You are grossly simplifying what I said and I believe being shortsighted. Please contact me personally if you would like me to go into further detail or send you reading material.

Do they have to start hoping that the FSPers will see the abuse and then look up the NH Underground forum to find out who needs to be ostracized this week?

The FSP is filled with media people. There are FSP member news papers (NH Free Press, Grafton has a FSP create newspaper), nationally sindicated radio shows (Free Talk Live, Free Minds Radio), online video news reporters (Ridley Report, OTN, Free Minds TV), online cartoons (Anarchy in your head), blogs of all sorts, podcasts (Liberty Conspiracy, Free Minds Radio). Many FSP members are business owners (restaurants, pubs, etc.). As you can see there are plenty of avenues.

2) Let's look at purchasing the animals from the neglector or abuser: We should monetarily reward them for repugnant behavior? Really? ...

If you want answers to these contact me personally.

And FWIW...there's been more than one FSPer being very verbal on equine BBs claiming FSPers are being insulted by being called anarchists. That FSPers aren't anarchists and it's an insult to call them that. :confused:
I didn't claim all FSP members were anarchists. I said many of them are. Which is true. The rest are minarchists as the statement of intent (http://www.freestateproject.org/soi) which each FSP member signs says they agree that the "maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property."

The family was disarmed. Because SANE people do not wear firearms on their own property to protect it against law enforcement.
Do you seriously believe that? Would you be willing to provide evidence to this claim? They were not carrying at the time of the raid. The search warrant indicated that all arms be secured generally. I don't know where you are from but in NH it is not an entirely foreign thing to open carry. You may carry a firearm openly without a permit or license of any sort. Including into state houses. Only courts are restricted.

Unfortunately for some FSPers they don't agree with that majority. And to want the majority changed for a select few is dictatorship...which *definitely* infringes on everyone else's rights for majority rule.
1) The US is not a democracy and theoretically majority does not rule. There is a federal and state constitution which claim to exist to protect individual's innate and inalienable rights.
2) Argumentum ad populum and argumentum ad baculum aren't going to get you far. It was once 'majority rule' in Germany to gas Jews, gays, handicapped, Romas, etc. To ban homosexuality and whites from marrying blacks and blacks to be slaves in the US. I'm hoping that you disagree that those actions were acceptable.

Does their right to property mean they can not vaccinate for diseases or test for diseases and put everyones' property within a few miles' radius at risk?
Yes. Would you advocate forced vaccinations for all children of all diseases currently which have vaccinations? And updates as new one's become available?

How about the possibility that they dug their own septic or are keeping extra living quarters on their property? Does their right to property trump their neighbors' rights to their property being safe simply because they're FSPers?
Do those things damage the neighbor's property? A septic may. But until it did there is no infringement.

I have horses...I have neighbors. My well and septic are set so as not to infringe on their property rights and all manure on my property is handled and located in a way so as not to infiltrate on my neighbors. It will not contaminate their wells, make them sick, stink up their property or brign them more flies. Because that infringes on their property right to quiet and safe enjoyment.

Good to hear. Contamination is an aggressive act. If it could be shown that flies were coming from a neighbors property you'd have a case against them. Just as would be stench or noise. You are mixing it seems clear cases of property infringement with your views of how thing ought to be.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:13 PM

Hey, I'm still trying to figure out who was nursing if there are no babies there and she didn't sell any horses last year.

I am very afraid of what the 3 that went to the rescue might look like.

FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL.

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:17 PM

Bile- all notions of libertarianism aside, all one has to do is realize that Arabian horses were bred and intended for use on the ARABian peninsula. These are desert horses, for crying out loud. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that Arabians (or any horse, for that matter) are not meant to be cooped up in a crappy round pen while being poorly fed and cared for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_horse

I suggest the owners of these horses either learn to comply with the existing laws of the country they live in, make legitimate efforts to change the law, or move elsewhere. Breaking the law because you don't agree with the law is idiotic.

My family owned Arabians. I'm aware of their particulars.

Please... breaking laws you don't agree with is idiotic? So those who smoke marijuana for medical reasons are idiots? And Rosa Parks was an idiot? And Gandhi? Abolitionists on the underground railroad? I'm not claiming that anything here is on that scale but your blanket statement that laws represent legitimate or moral behavior is ridiculous.

gloriginger

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:17 PM

I want to add that, while this is NOT an excuse, Arabians aren't as easy to keep as one might think. They are a lot like keeping TB's. They have a high metabolism, they "TEND" to be on the more active side. You have to be very careful with the amount of protein they get. And IR runs in the Arabian breed so you have be just as careful identifying those that could be IR. I've known many Arabian stallions who have their grain floating in oil just to keep them looking good.

yes, exactly. I was going to post this earlier - that I had to respectfully disagree with Mistyblue that arabians are airferns. I have been around a lot of arabian farms in my time in Arizona- and they definitely are not most commonly easy keepers. Everyone that I know that competed in endurance fed a pretty high fat diet (top dressing with Empower). Hay alone is not going to cut it- not in NH in the winter. Sorry.

Arabians also tend to drop weight easily when stressed- and I would imagine being transported on a school bus cross country was quite a stressful situation, in addition to the change in altitude and difference in humidity. I have been in Colorado in the winter, it is not near the biting cold that we have in New England.

For reference this is what a round bale should be contained in:

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/horses/facts/06-075.htm

please refer to the section on this link that explains why one would use a round bale feeder, versus sticking it on the muddy ground.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:25 PM

Bile, if you have owned horses then you know what they did was wrong. So your proposition that public shame will help is wrong. You guys are helping the horse neglecters, not shunning them.

You are defending them and pretending to not understand and giving them free labor and help so even the market cannot shut them down.

With friends like you only the authorities can stop them.

So you guys are actually like the Nazis in protecting your own and turning a blind eye no matter what. Huh.

So you have no need for information from us. K. I think we should all turn our attention to helping the NHSPCA control and contain this mess. Education is not going to help here.

JSwan

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:38 PM

You are invited to contribute to the conversation in a more constructive and mature manner. I pointed out the origins of the handle. If you wish to bring it down to ad hominem attacks I will gladly leave you all to your devices.

This is a board for discussion of horses, horse sports, and the horse industry. Not your politics or personal philosophy.

You will not find one member of this BB that believes owning a horse is an absolute right that carries with it no responsibility for that animals health and welfare. Not one.

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:39 PM

Said they weren't being fed grain every day but had hay available 24/7. Since when is grain a daily requirement? I'm sorry but you are all nitpicking this to death. The shelters and fences were damaged in the recent storms. If you drive through NH you will see in the forests the damage the ice storms did. You can't just fix that 100% with 2+ feet of snow on the ground. I was in NH the weekend before the raid and there was ice and snow everywhere.

They moved in at the beginning of the winter. They moved 30 horses. I see plenty of random short comings to their setup but nothing yet serious enough to justify what happened to them. Some slim horses aren't in danger. Even the woman at Live and Let Live Farms said there was nothing she saw that was a problem. Is she part of the lie?

bile

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:43 PM

This is a board for discussion of horses, horse sports, and the horse industry. Not your politics or personal philosophy.

You will not find one member of this BB that believes owning a horse is an absolute right that carries with it no responsibility for that animals health and welfare. Not one.

Way to divert the topic.

I was asked about my beliefs. I asked individuals to contact me personally in an attempt to honor the forum's rules. No need to be rude. I have been courteous.

Mav226

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:47 PM

Please... breaking laws you don't agree with is idiotic? So those who smoke marijuana for medical reasons are idiots? And Rosa Parks was an idiot? And Gandhi? Abolitionists on the underground railroad? I'm not claiming that anything here is on that scale but your blanket statement that laws represent legitimate or moral behavior is ridiculous.

In many states, there are provisions UNDER THE LAW where a person can smoke marajuana legally for medical reasons. That is the exact opposite of breaking the law because you don't like it.

Rosa Parks, Gandhi, and those working the Underground Railroad were making "legitimate attempts to change the law." That was exactly what I said in my original post.

I stand by my statement. The owners need to comply with the law of the country they are CHOOSING to live in, make legitimate efforts to change the law, or find another place to live.

Breaking the law by abusing and neglecting animals who are under your control hardly constitutes making a legitimate effort to change the law.

And were I Rosa Parks (which I'm not), I would be offended that some morons (the owners, not you personally) think they are fighting for a cause as significant as the American Civil Rights Movement by neglecting helpless animals, disrespecting law enforcement officers, and posting melodramatic videos online about the various reasons why they are unable or unwilling to provide proper care for their horses.

BuddyRoo

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:49 PM

Is it time for more COTH Dogs and the Crayola Bus?

Or just the clue train? Toot! Toot!

I don't get it. I don't even see what's debatable at this point. Fruit loop whackadoo gets some horses, doesn't follow the state statutes, gets a warning, disregards it due to political leanings, suffers consequences.

She's hardly a persecuted martyr for the cause. She's a hoarder whose horses have been neglected. And she's not even being original about it. Right out in the big wide world she posted the classic statements we hear again and again from hoarders and people who neglect their animals.

The only twist really is the political piece. At the end of the day though, that's irrelevant. If you don't like the laws change them....you don't win thumbing your nose at them...and neglecting creatures who are solely dependent on you in the process. Doesn't win anyone much support.

equinelaw

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:50 PM

Grain is a daily requirement when hay is not enough. Hay was not enough. You either grain daily or you do not. Its not like giving a dog a handful of table scraps when you have leftovers.

The made excuse why their won horses were skinny. Do you now think they are lying about the condition of their own horses?

The horses we see are the ones that were not in danger. And hey still look like crap and have signs they have looked worse.

They had time to make repairs. They just wanted to wait until it suited them. That is not a luxury you get with horses.

That had money to buy enough feed so that their horses could eat enough to not be skinny and require excuses. They chose not to buy that feed.

Those tiny little lots are disgusting. It took one day to put up new fence. It takes 1 day and one person to put up new electric fence. Why didn't they just go outside and do it? Because it was cold? It wasn't too cold for the horses. . .

The storms were not recent and the man said his fences fell down. He did not say it was due to the storms.

Who knows why she said what she said. It was a quote taken out of context and from a woman who probably wouldn't want to be seen as the sourse of the complaints.

gloriginger

Mar. 18, 2009, 06:02 PM

the ice storm in NH was December 11-12. I was without power for 4 days- I know the magnitude of the storm. I also know that shortly after that storm at the end of December we had days that were in the 50s.

Horses that need grain- need it every day. That is the whole living breathing being thing, just like we need to eat every day- they do too- preferably twice a day. Moldy crappy hay that has been stomped on and pooped on and peed on is not sufficient nutrients for horses....

What's that saying- don't wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it.

I do think it's time for the crayola posse...

JSwan

Mar. 18, 2009, 06:04 PM

Way to divert the topic.

I was asked about my beliefs. I asked individuals to contact me personally in an attempt to honor the forum's rules. No need to be rude. I have been courteous.

As have I. And I have respect for those with whom I disagree on political matters.

But I will never - EVER - countenance neglect or abuse of any living thing. Whether you like it or not - no one in the US has the right to abuse or neglect an animal, regardless of their political or religious beliefs.

You, and the others involved in this incident, have a legal and ethical obligation to provide your animals with basic requirements. And the requirements are - very very very basic. There are many acceptable methods of horsekeeping, but the basic requirements remain the same. Food, water, shelter, veterinary/farrier care. Basic.

Descartes was wrong. Evidently everyone knows that except your group.

I'm a farmer and am responsible for every living being on my land. The fact most of them are destined for the table does not mean they are any less capable of suffering.

And by God I'll starve before I'll let any of them starve. SHAME on the person who does not tend to their animals.

MistyBlue

Mar. 18, 2009, 06:11 PM

The FSP is filled with media people.
Non FSP members aren't likely to find your information. So that point is moot for the general public...which there are more of them.
Do you seriously believe that? Would you be willing to provide evidence to this claim? They were not carrying at the time of the raid.
Yes, I believe that. As someone who volunteers through law enforcement and teaches firearm safety...I do believe that. If they weren't carrying during the raid, why the talk radio video mentioning they were disarmed that day? I'm positive their actual arms weren't removed, so disarmed of what? I have to assume arms...as in weaponry. BTW...the best thing in the world for the anti-gun folks is seeing anarchists playing at cowboy carrying in plain site anywhere. If NH was the target state for being the safest as a reason...why the need to carry everywhere? I'm 5'2", female, about 120 lbs soaking wet. I can leave my house unarmed despite owning a virtual arsenal.
Argumentum ad populum and argumentum ad baculum aren't going to get you far. It was once 'majority rule' in Germany to gas Jews, gays, handicapped, Romas, etc. To ban homosexuality and whites from marrying blacks and blacks to be slaves in the US. I'm hoping that you disagree that those actions were acceptable.

Grammatically painful but...if you admit to claiming to be Rosa Parks and Gandhi is overplaying it...then how is the Holocaust not doing the exact same?
Yes. Would you advocate forced vaccinations for all children of all diseases currently which have vaccinations? And updates as new one's become available?

I'm not discussing children. With livestock, if you bring diseased ones into my state within a certain radius and those diseases spread to my horses from the flies...then YES...it's invading my property rights. Because your lack of following the law on one of the fastest spreading extremely deadly diseases is killing my animals on my own property. Which BTW it would then spread across the state like wildfire...wiping out everyone elses' property rights. This one point alone is massive.
Do those things damage the neighbor's property? A septic may. But until it did there is no infringement.

"Until it does" is too late. And the cost of cleanup of that biological mess? Tens of thousands minimum. Not to mention the diseases it spreads. Ever see someone with E Coli? Not pretty. That's the reason why there's a permit and test process for morons who thinks they can dispose of their own human waste. Again...another way to wipe out your neighbor's rights with something potentially deadly. You FSPers are just mind boggling in your ignorant stand on absolute rights.

There are many many NHers on this BB who went through the same storms and got their happy arses outside to repair damages the next days. Same with my cousins who live in NH...all got on their Carhartts and left their cozy homes and computer keyboards and went outside to repair damages. In below zero weather. Apparently farm folk are of tougher stock than those who prove toughness solely through their keyboards, youtube, radio and wearing sidearms cowboy style.

jeta

Mar. 18, 2009, 06:14 PM

The shelters and fences were damaged in the recent storms. If you drive through NH you will see in the forests the damage the ice storms did. You can't just fix that 100% with 2+ feet of snow on the ground. I was in NH the weekend before the raid and there was ice and snow everywhere.

They moved in at the beginning of the winter. They moved 30 horses. I see plenty of random short comings to their setup but nothing yet serious enough to justify what happened to them.

If I have followed this correctly, the ice storm in question was some time ago earlier in the winter? While you are probably correct in that you can't fix 100% in 2+" of snow and ice all the damaged fencing and housing of these animals, it does not seem as though these people were prepared or willing to care for their horses for even a mild winter. Haphazard, flimsy fencing...Umm honestly, even non-horse people would take one look at the set up we have seen on their own video and realize it was inadaquate and unlikely to withstand any significant wind....I live in Western NY where we are quite well known for our ice storms, so am quite well acquainted with the mess they leave behind....But, please, don't insult us by excusing these people for being ill prepared...The $20,000 defense fund would have gone a long way in providing some adaquate temporary fencing and run-in sheds.

Question: Video star addresses the camera and claims that they have necessary health certificates for these horses and they are all in boxes SOMEWHERE....REALLY??! How can that be? They transport 30 horses across the country in a ( okay I will be generous here ) converted school bus and have to cross multiple state lines in order to do this and they can't produce the necessary documents to prove these animals are safe to travel? What the hell would they have done had anyone asked them for proof of rabies vaccination and coggins tests, say, half way to their destination?

Somewhere along the line in the very first video I thought I recalled our star videographer stating one of the reasons for this RAID was that they either could not or would not provide documentation of necessary vaccinations...Please correct me if I am wrong on this one, but if that is true couldn't SOME of this ordeal been minimized by just producing the documentation that he claims in the later video we have SOMEWHERE....Or maybe that is the point....A Pot Stirrer Extraordinare!!!!

Interesting thread I must say....