Foal born with no eyes [Archive]

Sandbarhorse

Dec. 28, 2005, 10:33 AM

I'd have put the foal down also. A very sad thing, but IMVHO, a kinder choice in the long run.

Horses are prey animals. Even those raised in a domestic environment have prey animal characteristics and reactions. While hearing is important to their lives, sight is fairly important as well (we've all had our horses raise their heads and gaze into the horizon right before they cut and run, no?).

By raising this horse, there would be a higher risk of injuries, but also an animal that needs to be able to look for predators and who cannot do that. IMO, that need is instinctual and the foal would have been stressed by its inability to see.

Horses that go blind over time are not in the same category. It frequently happens slowly, giving them time to adjust, and often happens in a familiar place. This means that injury is less likely and confidence in the people and pasture mates that the horse ends up being reliant on has had time to build.

HeyYouNags

Dec. 28, 2005, 10:34 AM

I would think a horse that was born with sight and became blind would have had an opportunity to learn more normal horse behavior via visual cues. A foal born blind would never have that chance. A lot of horse socialization and escape behavior is visually based.

If it had been my foal, I would have euthanized it, for the reasons others mentioned. There are plenty of horses in the world already that need homes. If the owner of the foal decided he/she wanted to keep it, and was in a position to make a commitment to take care of it forever, then that's his/her choice, I suppose.

Estelle

Dec. 28, 2005, 10:39 AM

I think thats a matter of opinion personally..who's to say that a horse born blind wouldnt handle it even better then one that goes blind as that is all the horse knew?

Timex

Dec. 28, 2005, 10:48 AM

while i'm not sure of what the difference is between a horse born blind and one born without eyes, i do know horses and ponies that get along quite well, even though they are blind. my question would have been to what other problems he might have had, invisible to the naked eye? any other congenital issues going on?

Home Again Farm

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:12 AM

As I understand it this deformity is usually caused by the mare being exposed to herbicide or other poison during early gestation. There are often other internal defects in such cases, as the whole body's formation was exposed to the poison at a critical time for development. Thankfully, such things are rare. I would have put this foal down.

physical.energy

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:18 AM

I know a couple of blind horses and though they do have special needs they are fine. Jeanette Sassoon had an article written a couple of years ago about her blind horse that she competes.
I understand for many it is kinder to put them down because I hate to see a horse suffer. However, I couldn't do that. I would have a lifelong pet and would care for him as he needed for as long as he had a good life. It takes tremendous commitment but many parents do that for special children every day. So he is a special equine child. A carefully thought out living accomidation would be in order.
If on the other hand I were a breeder with no time for such things I may have to put him down as well. You have no guarantee once you place a special horse like this that it will be handled and cared for correctly.

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:21 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">what's the difference as far as how the horse gets along between no eyes and blind? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many "blind" horses (& people) are visually impaired but can see light vs. darkness or perhaps even some large shapes. Any clue can help with adjustment & survival. Without eyes, there are no clues at all.

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:22 AM

What I'd like to know is THE NAME OF THE SIRE OF THE EYELESS FOAL! Two Simple, do you know or can you find out?

physical.energy

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:31 AM

Geez is it only the sire that has an affect on a foal with or without eyes??? Does the mare have any impact on this? Wouldn't publically announce a sire on this as it could harm his reputation unnecessarily!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

nettiemaria

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:33 AM

This week I saw an ad in the paper - I knew who had placed the ad, because last fall, I had went to this persons' house. She had a blind mare, totally blind, AQHA. Well, she was advertising this horse as "Free, AQHA Mare." So . . . perhaps some good minded person came and got the mare, but I also know of a few horse traders in the area who have gotten children's ponies and all sorts of person's horses, saying it was going to a good home, and guess where it went? I will get ripped for this, but if it were me, I would have to try to find the strength to humanely put it down. I'm not saying I could do it - but that would be the wisest decision IMO. Sad, very sad, and who am I to judge? But what if something happened later on and I could not take care of the horse?

shakeytails

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:46 AM

I'd have euthanized the foal, too, for the same reasons most of the others have given.

J Swan

Dec. 28, 2005, 11:51 AM

I would have euthanized as well.

Lovely stories about the will to live, and legends and all that - but perfectly lovely riding horses go to slaughter all the time, as did the great racehorse Ferdinand; as well as the old and unsound. No one wants them - why would they want a 1000lb animal with no eyes?

And horse rescues are full to overflowing. Many anti-slaugher people have posted about how such horses as this foal end up in the kill pens. (this is not about starting a slaughter argument).

So unless this owner was prepared to care for this unfortunate animal all its days - I think she did the responsible thing by euthanizing.

If I was a breeder - I would do my darndest to find out why the defect came to be. In that case - posing this question on the breeding forum might yield some useful information. I have some ideas but defer to those folks as they are more knowledgeable.

And yes - it could give her farm a bad name. In which case no one would want her horses - would you?

It's for the same reason QH horses want to know if their horse has the Impressive gene.

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 12:08 PM

JennyM

Dec. 28, 2005, 12:22 PM

J swan

The way the whole slaughter thing could be ended, horse prices brought up, and the unwanted to be wanted, is to STOP breeding as many horses and get over the whole thing of "if it doesnt have a pedigree then it isn't worth anything" A nonpedigreed horse CAN do anything a pedigreed one can!

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 12:34 PM

hmmm...you say it was a filly but she put HIM down?
Quite a story. I think most people make who their decisions and have to live with them don't need others second guessing when it's this type of an issue.

J Swan

Dec. 28, 2005, 12:49 PM

Bogey - well said.

JennyM - Many folks feel they have a duty to the animals they bring into the world. And that duty includes helping unfortunate animals out of this world in a peaceful, humane manner. Perhaps the thought of this poor animal ending up in an uncaring, unsafe environment was not a risk she was willing to take. And perhaps the fact that her business - and possibly the careers and lives of the horses she's sold - could be adversely affected influenced her decision as well.

It's called personal responsibility.

Levi's owner

Dec. 28, 2005, 12:51 PM

So sad....but I would have put the foal down too. It's not like a blind dog or cat, it's a 1000 pound animal.

Hucklebug

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:00 PM

i think i'm changing my mind on this...i hadn't thought about the light/dark issues etc.

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hucklebug:
i think i'm changing my mind on this...i hadn't thought about the light/dark issues etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, the light/dark issue applies if the eyes ever had sight...this foal was born without eyeballs at all was my understanding.

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:18 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JennyM:
I also believe that they are their responsiblity but I also believe that if they made the choice to breed the mare that they should take the resposablity even if the horse is not up to snuff. I think that if a person could not care for the horse they could try to find a responsible person willing and that would like to care for the horse. No one would have to know that this horse came from this stud and they could adopt it to someone with the agreement that if they can't keep it then it will be returned intill another home is found! I dont think the owner is wrong for having the colt put down. But I would have done it different. It is their horse their decision. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only problem with situations like this is when the animal isn't being well taken care of as promised, and it ends up abused/neglected. happens everyday with horses with full sight. It's one thing for the baby to be pigeon toed, it's another to have no hope for sight. Not arguing with you, we all love horses and that's why we are here. Sometimes things don't go like we'd hope, as was the case for this foal.

Aggie4Bar

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:21 PM

I would also have euthanized the foal.

A friend of mine has a mare with some interesting facial and spinal deformities. While conducting a little research, she actually encountered many people who had live foals with similar issues, including a couple that were born without eyes. The general consensus was exposure to pesticides caused the defects.

WildWest

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:27 PM

Also would have euthanased.

azure

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:31 PM

Maybe this is obvious to all, but many of the blind horses that you all see getting around so well may have been born with sight. There is a big difference between a horse growing up normally, being trained under saddle and THEN going blind and a horse that is completely blind from birth. A horse that has sight for some part of his life is going to be able to pick up on the visual cues so important to a prey animal and have a decreased chance of injury from walking into things, being stepped on, etc while he's still young and fragile.

With the above said, I would euthanize this horse too. I don't think there is any way that he could get through foalhood without being watched nearly 24/7, and his life would be very lacking in the quality department.

Red Hunter

Dec. 28, 2005, 01:54 PM

If I had a foal born, as the one you described, I would have put it down, without a question. It would have been very cruel to have kept that foal alive. What quality of life would it have had?

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes I do, but I think it would be unfair for me to publicize it here. This stallion has sired hundreds of foals and many of them have turned out to be fantastic. This was a single, bizarre case that could have happened to anybody on any farm from any mare/stallion combination. She euthanized the foal to avoid bad criticism of her stallion and her farm. For me to disclose her farm name or her stallion's would be a very dirty deed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's the least you could do....seriously, it is so wrong to second guess this person's decision. NO ONE can say what they would do unless they have been through this. Shame on you.

Home Again Farm

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:27 PM

The general belief regarding this sort of deformity is that the mare was exposed to some sort of poison (herbicide, plant, etc) during the first 90 days of gestation. That is the time when the organs, etc are being formed. I would NEVER think to blame this on the stallion or the mare.

As far as euthanizing the foal goes, we'd all like to hope for the best outcome and a rosey future for such an animal. The sad reality is that many fully sound, normal horses are sent down a spiraling road to neglect, abuse and worse. Sometimes the kindest way is not what we might first think. Perhaps, one needs to be of a certain age and to have seen enough that did not end happily to feel this way. IMHO, of course. This is a deeply personal issue for each of us to decide.

I have a breeder friend who had such a foal born — but it had one eye. That foal was placed in a caring home and lived a good life. But, with both eyes missing, I'd opt for euthanasia.

saje

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JennyM:
I also believe that they are their responsiblity but I also believe that if they made the choice to breed the mare that they should take the resposablity even if the horse is not up to snuff. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Euthanizing a foal born without eyes IS taking responsibilty for the baby's welfare. There are far worse fates than a kind and early death.

The horse could have lived 30 years or more, who's to say that in all those years there will be somebody with the time, the facilities, the knowledge AND the desire to care for this poor beast? What happens if it's been raised alone or with one companion animal and in a safe environment, and then something tragic happens and the horse needs to be rehomed? And instead of getting the perfect place, someone tosses this horse out in a field somewhere to fend for itself? Or sends it to an auction where it's stuck in a small pen with 25 other strange horses?

It could happen, easily. Caring owner dies or is incapacitated, family that is tying up owner's affairs knows diddly about horses and doesn't WANT to know, takes the easy route. Similar scenarios occur all the time to horses, cats, dogs, any beloved pet or animal friend.

I'd have euthanized the foal for it's own sake and safety, not the image factor.

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:36 PM

well said Saje

creseida

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:42 PM

I would euthanise as well.

Most of my reasons have already been said, so I shall not repeat them.

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:45 PM

My favorite ridding horse is so blind. My heart aches for you on this.

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:49 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Wow, take a pill and relax. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no I won't...if you own horses then you know that heart breaking decisions are made often...and the last thing needed is boobs like you making the decision maker feel bad. But, it happens all of the time...very easy for you to say what you would do. This is why I would never post asking advice from arm chair quarter backs on the internet when it comes to such decisions.
Find something else to wonder about will you?

Giselle

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bogey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Wow, take a pill and relax. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no I won't...if you own horses then you know that heart breaking decisions are made often...and the last thing needed is boobs like you making the decision maker feel bad. But, it happens all of the time...very easy for you to say what you would do. This is why I would never post asking advice from arm chair quarter backs on the internet when it comes to such decisions.
Find something else to wonder about will you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Touche. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Giselle

Dec. 28, 2005, 02:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
You seriously need to calm down and get a grip. This is a DISCUSSION BOARD where ideas are DISCUSSED. I did not name any names of horses, the breeder, the farm, or even the state this all happened in! It was merely a thread to discuss the pros and cons of euthanizing or saving a horse born blind.

Try refreshing yourself on forum rules before you call me a "boob" again ok? Christ. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I read the rules and you're still a boob!

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:02 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Try refreshing yourself on forum rules before you call me a "boob" again ok? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:04 PM

No where in Two Simple's posts in this thread did I see her try to make anyone feel badly. Sounded more to me like a "What would you do?" kind of thing. No need for name calling.

Giselle

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
I am a "boob" because I asked people to tell me how they would handle this difficult decision? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Go troll somewhere else. And while you're trolling, you might want to check out some of the other 15,987,356,921 topics on this bulletin board in which folks discuss ideas. You might learn something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're rude and nasty, if that makes me a troll...so be it.

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
Thank you Appassionato (gosh that's hard to spell). I am NOT attempting to make anyone feel bad. That is why I will not give names or more specific details. I just wanted to know what others thought and what they would have done. I like to discuss things because you just never know when it might be you (or me!) in a similar situation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL about the name! Nothing tickles me more than listening to an announcer say it...LOL! And funny you mention about being one of the folks in a situation, I am trying to save about 20 horses from starvation currently (state is sitting on it). Nevermind, when my horse first arrived down here from his former stable, people accused me of starving my horse! Couldn't be further from the truth! Once he got on more grass I noticed a big turnaround...but up in ATL that can be hard to find. We did our best there. Here, I get better. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Try your best to realize the "internet badasses" for what they are. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Bogey

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:14 PM

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 03:28 PM

I don't think anyone was cutting you down JennyM, just offering another perspective based on, "if a loving home was found..." kind of thing. I think most people, as I believe you were as well, were trying to think of every possible corner that animal might turn, no pun intended.

Appassionato

Dec. 28, 2005, 04:02 PM

I guess it would just depend. My dad had a deaf cat, and that thing was terrified of it's own shadow until death. Like, abnormally spooky. Im sure folks have had blind or deaf animals that fared well, I just wonder if a horse could do it. Sure, you could talk to it everyday, grab it's halter and lead it's nose to it's feed, etc., but fencing? Other horses? That's where I couldn't protect him 24/7.

stfatpony

Dec. 28, 2005, 04:23 PM

No doubt, sad as it may be, I would have put it down also.

tbowner

Dec. 28, 2005, 04:25 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
I have a friend who had a gorgeous, Oldenburg colt born with no eyes a couple of years ago. Long story short, she euthanized him. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/cry.gif The sockets were completely empty with eyelids half shut. The vet said he could sew them completely shut so his face would be just smooth skin with no sockets exposed.

The only problem is that without extensive testing there was no way to tell if there were more issues besides the eyes. The vet seemed to think that more serious underlying nerve problems would be present. He seemed okay and rarely ran into things. He was never jumpy or spooky. He found his way around well but did seem to be kind of "slow." Almost like he was mentally challeneged???

This lady is a breeder and didn't want to make a bad name for her farm so put him down. A couple of us tried to talk her into adopting him out to a home who would keep him and love him but she would have no part of it.

If he were mine, I would have kept him. What would you guys have done? How often does something like this happen? What could have caused it? Yes, it was a couple of years ago but I think about it sometimes and just wonder what could have become of him had she given him a chance. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sadsmile.gif

(Edited for my typo) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you didnt create this post to hurt your 'friend' why the hell would you make it so personal?

why not post it as a rhetorical question, state what you would do in this situation and leave it at that?

No need to put friend down and try to build yourself up.

I for one would put the foal down. Give it a few really great days with the momma then end its life.

What is the point of keeping an eyeballess horse alive?
oh I know, it makes a great conversation piece, plus you get the added bonus of saying 'well Im a hero, I have a horse without eyeballs'

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 28, 2005, 04:45 PM

Posted by Home Again Farm:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The general belief regarding this sort of deformity is that the mare was exposed to some sort of poison (herbicide, plant, etc) during the first 90 days of gestation. That is the time when the organs, etc are being formed. I would NEVER think to blame this on the stallion or the mare. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Home Again Farm, could you please refer me to some studies or written information by authorities (I am referring to veterinarians and/or PhD level researchers) in horse genetics & horse breeding that promote a "general belief" that these types of defects are environmental, rather than genetic??

While it is certainly possible for such defects to be environmental (and environmental causes could include a lack of certain crucial vitamins, such as the connection between a lack of folic acid & certain birth defects in humans), I STRONGLY SUSPECT THAT A MAJORITY OF THESE DEFECTS ARE GENETIC. I know we breeders would prefer to think these defects are not genetic - but, we should face the truth and start tracking defects. Trying to avoid the truth of defects being genetic has perpetuated any number of defects & caused these defects to become widespread in various breeds.

I know of a stallion that has sired at least three foals with cephalic defects - I have no proof that this is genetic but it sure sounds suspicious to me.

Clarion

Dec. 28, 2005, 04:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Slewdledo:
I would definitely have put the foal down. Some people don't, and it's a recipe for disaster. It's dangerous. I have heard that Overbrook Farm in KY saved a no-eyed filly by...Jump Start out of Train Robbery, I think it was, and she was/is a walking lunatic. They saved her because of her breeding value.

There's a difference between blind and born with no eyes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aren't they worried her foals will have no eyes too? I knew a TB breeder once who bred a one-eyed mare(not blinded, born with one eye). Everyone but me seemed surprised that her foal was born with only one eye too. So sad. It definitely CAN be genetic rather than environmental and I would never breed a horse like that.

loshad

Dec. 28, 2005, 05:12 PM

A few years ago, I was working for a man who had a rather nice TB mare who was losing her sight. She had a nice big pasture and other horses around her, including one who kept close and was her protector and guide. I cannot begin to describe the number of injuries that this mare sustained (mostly because she would get spooked and run until she hit something) until the owner decided it was time to let her go. Believe me, it was not pretty and I would never want to see another horse go through that. Another employee and I argued that she should be put down long before he agree it was time for her to go.

It's all very well to say this colt could have been adopted out to a nice, loving home, but you can't put the ponies in bubble wrap and keep them safe from themselves. You also can't prevent people losing jobs and money, or changing their minds about the time and expense involved in caring for a blind horse.

IMO, the mare owner did the absolute best, most loving thing she could for that baby.

Oh, and as far as the mare owner's identity being a secret? How many people out there own really nice Oldenburgs who have given birth to no eyed colts in the past year? Anyone? Bueller?

CuriosoJorge

Dec. 28, 2005, 05:20 PM

Evalee, when you can produce DVM/PhD level research that shows definite genetic inheritance of this defect, then you can scream at people in capital letters. Until then, why don't you try the benefit of the doubt? If this is truly the only unfortunate case from a stallion that sired over 100 foals, I'd say it was an isolated incident, and look to some environmental factor. In your example of three foals with cephalic defects, that might be the beginning of a pattern.

For the record, most of the plant and pesticide teratogens that I recall produce angular limb deformities and tendon laxity. Probably the most well known plant teratogen is Veratrum californicum, which can produce cyclopia in sheep and cows if consumed on day 14 of gestation. I've never seen or heard of a case in a horse, though. I vaguely recall reading that horses seem to be resistant to its effects. Selenium overdose can cause some pretty wild defects; so can retinoic acid and nicotine derivatives. I'm not an alarmist, but with the stuff that's in ground water these days, it would be tough to tell what might have caused this.

I would have euthanized the foal at birth. There is really a difference between being born eyeless and being born with sight and then gradually going blind. People/horses with gradual loss of sight have time to adjust to their loss; things just "fade away" over time. Even people/animals that lose their site all at once in an accident have some mental frame of reference that they can probably use to "picture" later events in their heads. (And no, Evalee, I don't have any research to quote you; this is just my opinion!)

TwoSimple, no, I don't believe a horse born without eyes would be able to hypersensitize its other senses to be able to live anything resembling what we would consider a "normal" life.

ise@ssl

Dec. 28, 2005, 10:19 PM

Well we certainly wouldn't attempt to keep a foal born with no eyes. We would first donate the foal to a Veterinary School for research which would probably include euthanasia first. If they weren't interested we would opt for euthanasia.

CHJoker

Dec. 29, 2005, 12:30 AM

No question, I would put the foal down. The owner made the best, most responsible, and least selfish decision.

Bogey

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:06 AM

Two Simple, I am not a troll. I am a horse owner who has had to make some tough decsions over the years.
I ask you again...do you have horses? Have you ever been faced with a decision on their quality of life?

sa11yb

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:22 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You know what tbowner? There are MANY details of the situation of which you are COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF that were omitted from my post. I absolutely guarantee that if this woman read my post she would have NO CLUE that I was talking about her. So chill. K? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Simple, how many breeders do you think have "blind" foals born? If it was me, the blind foal reference alone would make me think you were talking about me... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Slewdledo

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:31 AM

Oh. I thought you were asking her why, if she has horses, SHE didn't offer the horse a home rather than "encourage" the owner to "find" the horse a "good" home.

M. O'Connor

Dec. 29, 2005, 03:51 AM

I agree with human intervention (ie, euthanize) to assure a natural outcome: in nature the situation would quickly take care of itself and this type of defect would not be passed on.

hitchinmygetalong

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:11 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
You know what tbowner? There are MANY details of the situation of which you are COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF that were omitted from my post. I absolutely guarantee that if this woman read my post she would have NO CLUE that I was talking about her. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif So chill. K? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh. I guess Oldenburg colts born without eyeballs are a common occurrence in your neck of the woods.

I completely agree with M. O'Connor. Euthanize the foal - as soon as practical. The point about nature "taking care" of this is a good one.

cheryl ann

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:11 AM

Yes, I would have had the baby euthanized. That very day.

A sad circumstance, indeed.

deltawave

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:20 AM

ALL congenital anomalies are, in some way, "genetic". An embryo can only form (correctly or incorrectly) in response to a blueprint. Whatever made this poor foal develop with no eyes, it was in its genes.

Now as to what CAUSED the genetic mutation, that of course is open to speculation. There are lots of things that can cause mutations, but I would certainly not think that a lack of eyeballs would be anything transmitted from one generation to the next, unless one chose a parent with no eyeballs. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Most "genetic" mutations are SPONTANEOUS, and only affect the individual. That's not to say a spontaneous mutation can't be caused by something else--radiation is a great example--but unless the affected individual reproduces, the genetic anomaly stops there.

For the record, I too would have euthanized the foal and I think offering it to a vet school for research is a brilliant idea--might put an end, eventually, to a lot of harebrained and irresponsible speculation, for one thing. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Mother Nature (or God, whoever you care to cite) did not intend for this poor baby to survive. In the wild it would have probably been abandoned, quickly eaten or possibly even killed by the herd stallion. Euthanasia seems to me the kindest option.

Bogey

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:27 AM

so I ask again...what tough decisions have YOU made about your horses Two Simple?

Equibrit

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:28 AM

"Try refreshing yourself on forum rules before you call me a "boob" again ok? Christ. If you don't like the thread, then quit trolling it and save space for intelligent conversation."

Who's kidding who??

Bogey

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:32 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Your post is not worthy of reply. If you care to know how many horses I own and what disciplines I ride, I encourage you to do a search of my past posts. You will learn everything you need to know. I have owned horses for more years then you have probably been alive. And I have made more decisions and raised more babies than I can even recall right now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

then go back and read your post again...you were saying the woman made the decision because of her "breeding program". Is that part of the story you made up?
And Equibrit...are you talking to me?

Bogey

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:38 AM

you know what...I will leave...because you are Two Simple to get the point.
And searching your posts would make me http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif so thanks, but I will pass.

deltawave

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:44 AM

But the problem with that kind of research is that the defect in question (no eyeballs) is so vanishingly rare and the generation time of horses is so very long that it would be incredibly difficult to show a strong HERITABLE genetic component.

Studying the foal's genome might be very useful and interesting, if in fact the horse genome is mapped. (is it?) Still wouldn't answer the question as to whether the defect was spontaneous or inherited, though.

Anyone who would BREED a horse with this kind of blatant defect is out of their mind, IMO, and I sincerely hope that if that is done it is a very isolated thing. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Inyureye

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:58 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In this context the correct spelling would be TOO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

How Simple?

Sheesh.

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 29, 2005, 04:58 AM

BAck to the topic at hand, and the idea of spontaneous mutations. HYPP appears to be one such spontaneous mutation. It is directly traceable to ONE individual. Why did it occur, noone can ever know that. But it did not appear in animals prior to the QH stallion Impressive and no recorded cases of it occuring in any other bloodline exist (including the speculation that it came from Three Bars(TB) whom showed up multiple times in Impressives pedigree). So this appears to be an example of a spontaneous mutation. The question becomes is a spontaneous mutation heriditable, soem are, some are not. But in the case of this foal, whether or not it came from a parent(s), or was spontaneous, should this foal have been llowed to survive and perhaps reproduce, there is a possiblity that it could have been inherited by the offspring. I cannot see any other "future" for such a foal other than possible breeding and whom would want to take a chance on that. So having reread this thread many times (and all the STUPID BS that is also going on, get a GRIP people!!) I stand by my original statement that euthanasia for a variety of reasons was the best course of action

WildBlue

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:08 AM

Thank you, Shawnee acres.

(And Clarion, for asking the question uppermost in my mind.)

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:17 AM

Posted by Deltawave:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Now as to what CAUSED the genetic mutation, that of course is open to speculation. There are lots of things that can cause mutations, but I would certainly not think that a lack of eyeballs would be anything transmitted from one generation to the next, unless one chose a parent with no eyeballs. Most "genetic" mutations are SPONTANEOUS, and only affect the individual. That's not to say a spontaneous mutation can't be caused by something else--radiation is a great example--but unless the affected individual reproduces, the genetic anomaly stops there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Posted by Two Simple:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I think this is a very interesting point that genetic mutations are spontaneous. I know I've heard about certain features or anomalies skipping generations and popping up later. . . .

So I wonder if this anomalie is something that could pop up several generations later? I also wonder if somewhere in this horse's pedigree, maybe quite a few generations ago, another horse had similar genetic problems? It would be very interesting research.

I also wonder if genetic mutations could manifest in different areas of the horse? So if Horse A with xxx gene mutation sires a horse, could the resultant foal have a DIFFERENT sort of gene mutation, but necessarily the same one?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll give a try at some of this.

Animals & humans have two kinds of tissue - bodily tissue (somatic tissue) and tissue in the gamete forming organs (ovaries or testes). This is very important to note.

If you have a mutation in your hand (in the skin from sunlight, in the bones from multiple x-ray exposure, whatever), that may harm you (by causing cancer, perhaps) but it will never be passed to a future generation because the mutation is NOT in your ovaries or testes.

If, on the other hand, you have a mutation in your ovaries or testes, and that mutation is incorporated into a future sperm or egg, then the mutation MAY show up in an offspring.

It IS possible for animals or people to be MOSAICS. This means some cells have a genetic component not found in other cells. This is occasionally seen in people with an extra chromosome, such as Down's Syndrome - some cells will have the extra chromosome & some will not. (Most people with Down's Syndrome have an extra chromosome in every cell - mosaicism is not common.)

IF a genetic difference is RECESSIVE, then you need two recessive genes for the difference to be expressed in the animal or human - one recessive from the mother/dam & one from the father/sire. An example of this in humans would be cystic fibrosis. Remember, the genetic differences are passed to offspring ONLY IF the genetic diffences are in the GAMETE cells. If two people (each with a recessive cystic fibrosis gene) marry, then each child they produce has a 1 in 4 chance of having cystic fibrosis.

A DOMINANT gene requires only one copy of the gene to be expressed in the bodily type (phenotype).

Now that is the over-simplified version of genetics - there are many other complications, including, but not limited to, sex linked inheritance, factors that influence the expression of genes, characteristics that are influenced by multiple genes (height, milk production, intelligence, etc.), and "blending" inheritance.

My concern with this foal is that the mutation was one that came from the parents, not from environmental exposure that affected the development of eyes, without affecting the future gametes. If records are kept & people are open & honest about the appearance of genetic defects, it would assist in studying these defects & determining which are inherited & how they are inherited. At this point in time, breeders prefer to keep these anomalous foals secret, which is not functional for the long-term good of horses.

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:18 AM

I really think youare trying to make two very different aituations similar. The question was NOT whether all genetic defects should be put down or not. The question was should THIS defect have been put down. I do not think all HYPP horses should be put down. I DO think that HYPP horses should NOT be allowed to reproduce however. Many HYPP hroses can and do live very normal lives with proper diet and maintenance and are functional. However a blind foal would NEVER be functional in any sense of the word, poor thing would never be able to run and play. So your question is really a moot point in my opinion.

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:20 AM

shawnee acres - WHO is trying to make two difference situations similar? And how are they making the two situations similar?

colleent

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:23 AM

When i was a youth, i hated the thought of someone euthanizing a perfectly lovable animal. and in time, as i lost faith in the human race, i saw that euthanasia is very often the better option. to this day i would rather humanely euthanize my dogs if i die( it's in my Will) rather than leave it to luck that they would not be treated well. i could not stand the thought of someone mistreating my "babies". to think of them tied to a tree for the rest of their lives or beaten, makes me sick. with a humane euthanasia, i know they will have had the best life they can. Horses are expensive animals and altho it's extremely sad, there are many horses being abused every day. there is no guarantee that you can afford your horse forever. life happens and if you do have to find a home for that blind horse that nobody wants, you may see that it would face an uncertain and frightening future.

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:24 AM

Evalee,

Look at Two Simples last post, you will understnad, sorry

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:28 AM

yes, two simple, there ARE exceptions to ANY rule, but if you took a poll of blind horses (total) vs. blind horses with truly productive lives, I think the percentage would be QUITE small that are actually doing things like that, and I'd be willing to bet that nearly none of them were born blind. Anyways, it appears at this point you simly want to argue and make this whole thing WAY TOO SIMPLE. I rest my case

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:31 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deltawave:
Now as to what CAUSED the genetic mutation, that of course is open to speculation. There are lots of things that can cause mutations, but I would certainly not think that a lack of eyeballs would be anything transmitted from one generation to the next, unless one chose a parent with no eyeballs. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Most "genetic" mutations are SPONTANEOUS, and only affect the individual. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this is a very interesting point that genetic mutations are spontaneous. I know I've heard about certain features or anomalies skipping generations and popping up later. I know a guy with bright red/orange hair and as far as anyone knows, he's the only one in the whole family tree. He's had children and they have brown hair. lol. But could his grandchildren or great grandchildren have red hair? I guess nobody knows.

So I wonder if this anomalie is something that could pop up several generations later? I also wonder if somewhere in this horse's pedigree, maybe quite a few generations ago, another horse had similar genetic problems? It would be very interesting research.

I also wonder if genetic mutations could manifest in different areas of the horse? So if Horse A with xxx gene mutation sires a horse, could the resultant foal have a DIFFERENT sort of gene mutation, but necessarily the same one? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was juat talking with my boarder about this this morning. Their daughter is probably not going to be taller than me, I'm 5'7". He mentioned that the girl's parents were shorter, so she couldn't end up tall. I said, "funny you mention that. My mom is 5'5", my dad is 5'4", I'm 5'7" and my two brothers were 6'3" and 6'4". Go firgure. Also, my mom had auburn hair, hazel eye, my dad had black hair and very dark brown eyes. Me and both of the brothers have blonde hair and blue eyes. We laugh about he must have been a very hot mailman, but alas, both of my parents have lots of German/Austrian heritage, and most of that side had blonde or light brown hair, blue eyes. just skipped my parents I guess."

andalusia

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:32 AM

Most breeders have put foals down for far less drastic reasons. Not all of us put them down to benefit our breeding programs or to avoid embarrassment. Many of us actually love all of our horses and treat them as individuals. So I admit I was bothered that you seemed to indicate that this breeder didn't want to make her farm look bad or cast doubts to the sire.

The key thing to me is that this foal was not born blind. He was born without any eyes. A horse slowly going blind (for whatever reason) still has a point of reference, a sight memory. And hopefully he is at the same farm as when he had sight. So, he is familiar with his surroundings. In the case of slowly loosing his sight, he can adjust as the process happens and, to some extent, the horse can compensate.

But a foal coming into the world with no eyes - I would not hesitate or lose sleep, I would put him down. It is sad? Of course.

Last spring I had a foal who during birth lost oxygen. For too long a period. I was preparing to put him down when the SO begged me not to. Right now, the foal presents only one problem, this is his whinney. He cannot make it in one sound. As if he stutters. My SO is very delighted with t his. But I have explained that other problems very may well present as he grows.

If she had not been there to stop me, I would have put him down and I still feel this would have been the correct decision. Even his mother declined to mother him as she knew something was not "right." So, my SO (as well as others here) kept a schedule to feed the little guy. He is a very sweet colt now, wonderful temperment, and only slight behind schedule. But very real and debilitating problems can present later.

I tell this story to underscore what another poster said. That breeders make very hard and sad decisions. But most of us do not make these deicisons because we do not want the sire or the farm to look bad. We make the decision because we feel it is the kind and responsible thing to do.

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by colleent:
When i was a youth, i hated the thought of someone euthanizing a perfectly lovable animal. and in time, as i lost faith in the human race, i saw that euthanasia is very often the better option. to this day i would rather humanely euthanize my dogs if i die( it's in my Will) rather than leave it to luck that they would not be treated well. i could not stand the thought of someone mistreating my "babies". to think of them tied to a tree for the rest of their lives or beaten, makes me sick. with a humane euthanasia, i know they will have had the best life they can. Horses are expensive animals and altho it's extremely sad, there are many horses being abused every day. there is no guarantee that you can afford your horse forever. life happens and if you do have to find a home for that blind horse that nobody wants, you may see that it would face an uncertain and frightening future. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's in my will to have my horse euthanized. he's old and delicate as far as his care. My cat will go to a friend of mine, or his family (big time cat lovers). I totally know where you are at on this one.

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andalusia:
Most breeders have put foals down for far less drastic reasons. Not all of us put them down to benefit our breeding programs or to avoid embarrassment. Many of us actually love all of our horses and treat them as individuals. So I admit I was bothered that you seemed to indicate that this breeder didn't want to make her farm look bad or cast doubts to the sire.

The key thing to me is that this foal was not born blind. He was born without any eyes. A horse slowly going blind (for whatever reason) still has a point of reference, a sight memory. And hopefully he is at the same farm as when he had sight. So, he is familiar with his surroundings. In the case of slowly loosing his sight, he can adjust as the process happens and, to some extent, the horse can compensate.

But a foal coming into the world with no eyes - I would not hesitate or lose sleep, I would put him down. It is sad? Of course.

Last spring I had a foal who during birth lost oxygen. For too long a period. I was preparing to put him down when the SO begged me not to. Right now, the foal presents only one problem, this is his whinney. He cannot make it in one sound. As if he stutters. My SO is very delighted with t his. But I have explained that other problems very may well present as he grows.

If she had not been there to stop me, I would have put him down and I still feel this would have been the correct decision. Even his mother declined to mother him as she knew something was not "right." So, my SO (as well as others here) kept a schedule to feed the little guy. He is a very sweet colt now, wonderful temperment, and only slight behind schedule. But very real and debilitating problems can present later.

I tell this story to underscore what another poster said. That breeders make very hard and sad decisions. But most of us do not make these deicisons because we do not want the sire or the farm to look bad. We make the decision because we feel it is the kind and responsible thing to do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is it possible that Two Simple meant no disrespect when she mentioned the breeding program? I offer this only because when she was asked "who is this stallion?!", she wouldn't answer, she didn't want the breeding program blamed for it. that's what I got out of it, but each of us read things differently sometimes.

At a farm I was at, we put a foal down that was otherwise healthy, but had very badly curved front legs. Wasn't just in the joint, a cannon was curved too. I felt bad for the animal, but also for the breeder that made the decision to put him to down. She just wasn't going to spend endless amounts of money on "fixing" this guy, with no real hope at that time he could handle the rigors of 3 day eventing. I respect her decision, this is what she does, breed for hard work. Could the animal have done treatments and been fine? Possibly. But in the end, considering all the neglect and abuse we hear about, I'll take what she did instead.

andalusia

Dec. 29, 2005, 05:52 AM

Ap: I actually thought this was an interesting discussion. And I was not sure of Two Simple's inflection - as is the case in cyber-discussion. That is why I only briefly mentioned it just in case! And then moved on to the issue she presented. I do think that many people see breeders as people interested only in the business end of things and not as caring horse lovers. Just as dog/cat breeders are frequently viewed in this manner.

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:13 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andalusia:
Ap: I actually thought this was an interesting discussion. And I was not sure of Two Simple's inflection - as is the case in cyber-discussion. That is why I only briefly mentioned it just in case! And then moved on to the issue she presented. I do think that many people see breeders as people interested only in the business end of things and not as caring horse lovers. Just as dog/cat breeders are frequently viewed in this manner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. If Two Simple had said, "What an a**hole this breeder is!!", I could understand the jumps on her. I consider this place a place of learning new ideas and sharing my own experiences for the better of my horses, and hopefully I was able to help other folks too through my experiences as I learn from theirs. Sure, I know some "breeders" that I think should be drug out into the street and shot for their practices, but I can't do anything about them. I also and respect some breeders too. But I can't run around assuming everyone means harm to others, that's just no way to live. Too much hate for my taste.

By the way, I responded to your post in that I felt you offered a great perspective. No harm meant when I mentioned about some folks and their accusations. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:27 AM

sorry two simple wasn't umping on you, and sorry if I felt you were creating an argument, I wasn't trying to do that just pointing out that the simalie you tryed to present between HYPP and a foal born with no eyes really wasn't valid, thats all. I agree this is an interesting discussion

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:37 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shawnee_Acres:
sorry two simple wasn't umping on you, and sorry if I felt you were creating an argument, I wasn't trying to do that just pointing out that the simalie you tryed to present between HYPP and a foal born with no eyes really wasn't valid, thats all. I agree this is an interesting discussion </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me??? No apologies necessary! As I mentioned earlier in other threads and possibly this one, we're all here because we love horses. And with any love, many woud fight for the best care. I know I do!

Genetics genetics. Wow, if it were really so easy to pin down, we'd have cancer cured, perfect horses, etc.! LOL!

Jasmine

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:41 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ALL congenital anomalies are, in some way, "genetic". An embryo can only form (correctly or incorrectly) in response to a blueprint. Whatever made this poor foal develop with no eyes, it was in its genes.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not true. Teratogens have an effect on which genes get turned on or off at different stages in development. There is NO mutation involved. They can be chemicals that interfere with the proper function of the genes, but there may be absolutly no genetic component to the problem. There is actually one drug that was used extensivly in England to help prevent morning sickness in pregnant women. The kids were born without arms and legs. There was nothing wrong with the DNA, it just wasn't allowed to function properly because of the chemical.

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:51 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jasmine:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ALL congenital anomalies are, in some way, "genetic". An embryo can only form (correctly or incorrectly) in response to a blueprint. Whatever made this poor foal develop with no eyes, it was in its genes.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not true. Teratogens have an effect on which genes get turned on or off at different stages in development. There is NO mutation involved. They can be chemicals that interfere with the proper function of the genes, but there may be absolutly no genetic component to the problem. There is actually one drug that was used extensivly in England to help prevent morning sickness in pregnant women. The kids were born without arms and legs. There was nothing wrong with the DNA, it just wasn't allowed to function properly because of the chemical. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that was due to drug chirality. We didn't know much about it at that time, thankfully we do now! finally we discovered which molecules react with what and how (chiralty being the placement of elements ona molecule in 3D). But once again, that reintroduces outside influence like pesticides. Just like is the case between spearmint and caraway, the molecular formula is exactly the same, but their placement in space is what makes them smell and taste differently. Same is done for enzyme-substrate action. If the substrate does not fit exactly into that enzyme, the enzyme will not work. That all said, only a certain portion has to fit in order to work. That's where the pesticides come in. People who have long and unprotected exposure to heavy amounts of pesticides are at risk for cancer. Now, we too are at the same risk when we spray malathion on roses. Our bodies produce cancer cells daily. The problem arrizes when we can't fight them anymore, and the cells divide uncontrollably.

Throw in DNA and it's weak hydrogen bonds, and possible mutations, and it's more than the poor soul can fight. However, that is all still in studies, everday.

JennyM

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:54 AM

just to let everyone know that I have seen a horse cope with no eyes just so you know why I wouldent put this horse down. I have seen a pony at a rodeo once with no eyes a little girl owned it. It was born without an eye and lost the other pooked out in a fence or something not sure but other wise it was just find the little girl that owned it led it around everywhere with her.I asked the girl how it got around in the pasture and in its pen and she said it had several companions that it followed around and it was very very kid safe didn't spook at anything and was old it was 16 years old at the time. Just to let everyone know that they can live..

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 06:56 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JennyM:
just to let everyone know that I have seen a horse cope with no eyes just so you know why I wouldent put this horse down. I have seen a pony at a rodeo once with no eyes a little girl owned it. It was born without an eye and lost the other pooked out in a fence or something not sure but other wise it was just find the little girl that owned it led it around everywhere with her.I asked the girl how it got around in the pasture and in its pen and she said it had several companions that it followed around and it was very very kid safe didn't spook at anything and was old it was 16 years old at the time. Just to let everyone know that they can live.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds like that horse had pasturemates AND people that could totally handle that horse's needs. That's awesome!

JennyM

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:05 AM

Yep it was really awesome!!

Penthilisea

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:11 AM

I know I'm coming late to this party but...
If I were a commercial breeder I probably would have done likewise. Now granted, if I was inutterably rich and such I wouldn'thaveput this foal down. But given a limited amount of resources it was a ethical responce.
In the "wild" this foal would have been savaged and eaten within hours or days. Period. Died painfully. All these conformational faults etc we crtitque have similar consuquences in the "wild". Can't run away from predators as fast etc. Compared to THAT euthansia is always a fine choice by my book. Overall, with so many unwanted horses and underfed horses and underfed unwanted KIDS in this world, I might choose to divert my resources elsewhere. But it is a personal choice and I wouldn't think someone who had kept this foal alive was wasting anything.
I know a breeder whoput down a yearling a few years back. She just kept colicing. Not a management issue, mare's first foal had had some intermitent GI issues too. Mare was never rebred and filly was put down to end her suffering. Filly LOOKED gorgeous- but something was wrong and it wasn;t fair to give her a life like that.

saje

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:18 AM

JennyM, you are missing the point.

That pony you saw at the rodeo was born with one eye, and therefore the chances are good that it had some sight, until that eye was lost. Again, it had some experience with the way the world looks etc. It was also lucky enough to have a person who cared for it.

Can a blind horse function? Of course, almost everyone knows at least one horse that has. Do they stand a greater chance of abuse (intentional or otherwise) in the course of their lives? I believe so.

If one of my horses went blind I would do my best to help him or her lead a happy and safe life. But I would euthanize in a heartbeat if I couldn't guarantee his wellbeing, and if I could no longer keep him.

An eyeless foal stands a MUCH greater chance of an unhappy life than a once-seeing horse gone blind. And there are so many horses who can lead safe, happy, productive lives with just basic care that need homes badly. Of course it's sad that the little guy didn't have a chance. But life is cruel, in the wild or in 'civilized' society.

Declaring

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:21 AM

The drug that caused the problems in England was Thalidomide. Just in case it helps anyone!

I have no experience to comment on this. I've euthanised many pets who became ill but never a baby. They were always old and sick and small.. when you are talking about something that will grow to be so large and live so long.. I understand why she did as she did.

Home Again Farm

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> At this point in time, breeders prefer to keep these anomalous foals secret, which is not functional for the long-term good of horses.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only incidence I personally know about was a foal born with one eye. Both parents WBs. Sire had probably fathered hundreds with many successful performance horses. Dam had had perfectly normal foals before — and had more after this one foal.

The vets that were consulted (private practice and University experts) stated that they felt this was not genetic but a very unhappy developmental anomalie. They speculated that it might have been caused by some poison in early gestation. That is all I know.

I have lived long enough to know that homes are not always permanent and that there is often a sad road for any horse that is not normal, sound, easy and lucky. To me some deformities are more significant than others. Lacking two eyes, to me, is a very serious defect.So I would have put the foal down — not for the sake of economy, but to know that that foal would never face what some poor creatures do, despite all good intentions of those who owned them once.

deltawave

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:36 AM

Maybe I was not clear enough--even a teratogen affects the GENES, or DNA. That IS a genetic anomaly, but not a HERITABLE one. We are all products of our DNA, but not all DNA (genetic) problems are inherited from our parents.

Thalidomide is a good example of a teratogen that affects the limbs long *after* the genetic blueprint is laid down, but the DNA/cellular development (ergo, the "genes") are still affected. But I think this is a semantic sort of quibble--point is, not all mutations or anomalies can be blamed on parentage.

Jasmine

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:39 AM

For every safe, happy, functional blind horse story out there, there is also one that ends tragically. A barn I boarded at had a horse that had gone blind. She knew her way arround the farm, knew when to come in for dinner. Unfortunatly, she COULDN'T judge when to stop while she was cantering up to the barn for dinner. She collided with the side of the barn and broke her neck. They don't all end warm and fuzzy.

Appassionato

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:45 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deltawave:
Maybe I was not clear enough--even a teratogen affects the GENES, or DNA. That IS a genetic anomaly, but not a HERITABLE one. We are all products of our DNA, but not all DNA (genetic) problems are inherited from our parents.

Thalidomide is a good example of a teratogen that affects the limbs long *after* the genetic blueprint is laid down, but the DNA/cellular development (ergo, the "genes") are still affected. But I think this is a semantic sort of quibble--point is, not all mutations or anomalies can be blamed on parentage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think we were in agreement.

Cindy's Warmbloods

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:56 AM

I know of a mare that only has one eye. Her first foal was born fine the second one only had one eye as well. Needless to say she will no longer be bred (nor will the offspring). A friend of mine adopted the foal. I think there is definately a hereditary issue in this case.
In the case of the foal born without two eyes I would not hesitate to put him down.

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:03 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> This lady is a breeder and didn't want to make a bad name for her farm so put him down. A couple of us tried to talk her into adopting him out to a home who would keep him and love him but she would have no part of it.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds pretty judgmental to me, despite the protestations. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

So you've changed the facts the facts so the breeder won't recognize herself/himself? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif That means maybe it's a filly, happened recently, not Oldenburg. How many do you think there have been?

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:06 AM

What about a foal deaf, blind with no legs? You could haul it around on a cart, Too Simple!

JennyM

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:08 AM

Now that is just mean!

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:14 AM

No it isn't .You could loooooove it.

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">egontoast - your childish display of thoughtlessness is not welcome here. Join the ranks of those who have contributed intelligent conversation and knowledge on genetics, or join the tiddly winks game going on in the romper room. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ARe you the moderator now?

Ps aren't you Ultimate Piaffe/Duces wild(sic)/various other alters who was banned from here? Just wondering. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

saje

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">egontoast - your childish display of thoughtlessness is not welcome here. Join the ranks of those who have contributed intelligent conversation and knowledge on genetics, or join the tiddly winks game going on in the romper room. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We need to introduce TooSimple to TheBard http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:51 AM

hehe saje

When no one agrees with you, page after page, maybe it's wise to get the thread closed.

Sandbarhorse

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:54 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">We need to introduce TooSimple to TheBard </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Has anyone sent him a link?

willowoodstables

Dec. 29, 2005, 08:56 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Untwist your g-strings ladies - this person will NOT have any CLUE that I'm talking about her. And you know what else? The breeder to whom I am referring does NOT go on the internet, and I know that to be a fact </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I have been reading this with interest. Majority say euthanize. So do I. No chance.

Onto the quote. Unless this breeder is a troll-friend of the others here under the same rock, do not kid yourself how quick she can find out about your UNDISCRECIANARY discreption of this event. I was never a forum person until a friend of a friend of a friend sent it down the line that I was being bashed to smitherines on a BB. And no, my name was not mentioned, but unless there are 2 people in the world with identical situations, you gotta be stupid not to figure you are the one in question. That said, I publically threated to sue the offending person and demanded a public apology. She had no idea that through email or via phone that I found out about her slanderous behaviour. Nuff said...always think before you put that foot into your mouth again. Big Brother watches and will slap you upside the head when you least expect it.

PS Take into fact a recent politician who bit the bucket because of a blog....hmmmmm...scarey ain't it.

Kim

egontoast

Dec. 29, 2005, 09:17 AM

Me too!

willowoodstables

Dec. 29, 2005, 09:19 AM

Simple..

It has been interesting in regards to genetics, enviromental causes etc. However, my comment was actually just a word of warning. I think that these kinds of topics do get highjacked, but re-reading the thread is insightful. Personal issues aside, the thought of "saving" a foal out of kindness is not something I am prepared to do, as a breeder or owner. It's about time, cost, effort and heartbreak. Period.

Kim

tbowner

Dec. 29, 2005, 10:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Two Simple:
You know what tbowner? There are MANY details of the situation of which you are COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF that were omitted from my post. I absolutely guarantee that if this woman read my post she would have NO CLUE that I was talking about her. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif So chill. K? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...because having a foal born with no eyes is a common occurance......?

ejm

Dec. 29, 2005, 10:30 AM

Seven pages, and apparently not a single post from anyone who has ever cared for a blind horse. Lots of "Oh, I knew someone who had a blind horse and it was all peaches and cream..." but apparently I'm the first person posting here that has ever had the day-to-day care of a blind horse.

This was an older broodmare that lost her sight in an accident when she was mature and had quite a bit of training under saddle. She stayed with us for several months to foal and raise her foal. Nice mare, good temperament, but she was big girl and could get a bit dangerous if something upset her. I talked with a couple of experienced farm managers who had cared for blind mares, and the consensus was that with good fences, careful management, and plenty of luck, a blind horse can probably do fine in a very structured environment. Caring for her was definitely not a casual affair though, and she was not a horse for an inexperienced handler in any situation.

One major Kentucky TB farm had a very well-bred filly born with no eyes, and due to her exceptional pedigree they kept her for a broodmare. She was a fairly good producer but according to the farm manager, was fairly difficult overall and sometimes dangerous to handle. And this was a spare-no-expense situation with top staff, plenty of people to help whenever needed, and the same daily caretakers, same ultra-safe paddock, same companion horse, everything structured to make this mare as comfortable as possible. Great situation, but how many of us here have the $$$ to offer that level of care and management?

Euthanizing this foal was the kindest option, IMO. If the OP has the time, facility and staff to raise a blind foal and maintain it until it dies of old age, have at it. If not, don't be so quick to condemn someone for making the best decision in a heartbreaking situation.

andalusia

Dec. 29, 2005, 11:03 AM

EJM: There have been some interesting and well-thought contributions here. But yours, by far, has the most weight. It is always easy to *imagine* oneself in a given situation; quite another to actually walk their walk. And you have walked that walk. Thank you.

Red Hunter

Dec. 29, 2005, 11:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ejm:

Euthanizing this foal was the kindest option, IMO. If the OP has the time, facility and staff to raise a blind foal and maintain it until it dies of old age, have at it. If not, don't be so quick to condemn someone for making the best decision in a heartbreaking situation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

EJM has the correct prospective on this topic.

Eileen M

Dec. 29, 2005, 11:25 AM

I have a horse that's going blind.

At 26, my QH gelding is losing his sight to cataracts. The left eye is totally clouded over..we figure maybe he can see shadows on a bright day. The right eye is half clouded over.Allowing him more vision , but also allowing for more of a chance to see "monsters".

As Jack is in the same place he has been for more than 10 years, turned out with the same mare all that time, too, we have decided that it is NOT his time. Yes, it means more work for us, but, in the end, it's what's best for Jack right now. The mare is already becoming his "seeing eye horse", if you will, so that's a big help.

Issues arise when going from light to dark ( in and out of the barn type stuff). But as his loss is gradual, we are all having time to adjust.

It wasn't an easy decision to come to, but, in the end, it's whats best for the horse that matters and is the most important.

Euthanizing the foal was the kindest thing that could be done.

Bringing up a thread like this, and wording it in a way that would incite discord, not something I'd want in my wallet.

Laurierace

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:25 PM

Unfortunately this exact same thing happened to me. It was my fourth foal from my mare. The first colt and by far the biggest and strongest of them all. I had him euthanized at 10 hours old. He was hysterical those entire 10 hours. He spent his short life screaming for his Mom even though she was standing right next to him. He would run blindly into the stall walls trying desparately to find her. The saddest part was in just those few hours of life he learned the sound of the stall door opening and would scream wildly as he knew we would help him find the udder.
It was heartbreaking for all involved but I feel I did the kindest thing for him. I pray I never have to make that decision again.

ladyfarrier

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:47 PM

You know, I've raised a lot of foals. And I love them all. When I think of what it takes to raise a *normal, healthy* foal to adulthood, without having them kill themselves--which
they try to do every single day of their young lives--I cringe at the thought of trying to raise a blind foal.

The type of life that would be necessary to keep it from injuring itself would be inhumane, IMHO. And the first time it ripped itself open, or fell and hurt itself badly I'd know in my heart that it was a given that it was happen sooner or later.

Picture a blind baby in any sort of a turnout situation. Its companions begin to run, through fear or frolic, and what happens to the one that can't see the danger in front of it?

We can build some sort of Black Beauty scenario in our head where we become it's eyes, or another horse becomes its guardian, but to be honest, I think that's extremely unlikely. More likely would be that Mother Nature would tell the herd to ostracize the "damaged" foal.

A horse that has gone blind has some learned responses and instincts to fall back on. An animal born blind doesn't have a clue, but still responds by fleeing. Right into danger, and presenting a danger to those (humans) around it.

I'd euthanize such a foal....as much as I'm a sucker for the impossible, I can't see my being able to be able to keep and protect such an animal 24/7 in a fashion that would be suitable for a free-roaming animal like a horse. Mother Nature would take care of this problem very expediently in the wild.

Equibrit

Dec. 29, 2005, 02:56 PM

Its a shame that it's illegal to euthanase people who were born without brains. If it were allowed, we would'nt have to put up with the emotional self serving drivel that passes for "intellectual" discussion on this board!

Bogey

Dec. 29, 2005, 03:15 PM

Equibrit http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

have a gin and tonic...I will have an ale and let's call it a night! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Touchstone Farm

Dec. 29, 2005, 07:26 PM

laurieace, that is absolutely heartbreaking. And as much as my heart would break, I too would put the foal down -- for all the reasons mentioned before.

And twosimple, I think it IS a good discussion and good that you didn't disclose the stallion's name as requested by EH. So many reasons why this could have happened. Anyway, sorry you're taking some "heat," but an interesting discussion nonetheless.

J Swan

Dec. 30, 2005, 02:39 AM

Equibrit - http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I guess I'll have to include myself in the "born without brains" - but I have to agree with you anyway. Way too many folks seeing pink on this BB.

Evalee Hunter

Dec. 30, 2005, 04:55 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And twosimple, I think it IS a good discussion and good that you didn't disclose the stallion's name as requested by EH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then, why is it OK to have this thread:

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/3206053911/m/584207938

naming a stallion *in the title of the thread* & asking if his descendants tend to have heart murmurs . . . but

*"everyone" thinks it would be wrong to name the stallion that is the subject of the thread I am posting on at the moment? I asked, in part, because I am curious as to whether the stallion Two Simple posts about happens to be the one I already know about who has sired 3 foals (known to me personally) with cephalic defects.

Although I did not continue my earlier thought as to evidence that the defect was an environmental anomaly, as proposed by Home Again Farm, I would like to say that when I asked

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Home Again Farm, could you please refer me to some studies or written information by authorities (I am referring to veterinarians and/or PhD level researchers) in horse genetics & horse breeding that promote a "general belief" that these types of defects are environmental, rather than genetic??
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was not looking for one anecdotal "oh, I know of a case" because, in my experience, veterinarians will seldom point to genetics for whatever reasons (avoid hurting the feelings of the client, maybe?)

I will give an example. I attended a college of agriculture in the 1960s when horses were less important economically. Part of the requirement for graduation was that I work on a farm (horse farms were not acceptable) so I worked 2 summers on dairy farms. The first farm had several cows abort the summer I worked there - aborted small, shriveled up, hard fetuses. These were Jersey (breed) cows. Now abortion is a BIG problem for dairy farmers because the cow must calve every year in order to continue to give milk & if she is not giving milk she is not earning her keep & must go off to become hamburg. These were some of the farm's "best" cows, bred there, & the decision had to be made - could they afford to carry non-productive cows for a year or should these cows go to slaughter. The family was distraught & they were harrassing employees - "Did you chase this cow? Did you do something to her? Did she fall?"

They talked to their veterinarian who examined the aborted fetuses & said "one of those things". Well, I was a teen-age college student & no one would listen to me, but "mummy calves" are an inherited defect, well known in Jersey cows. Why wouldn't the veterinarian speak up? Why wouldn't he go home & look thorough his text books on causes of abortion if he didn't remember? I don't know but what I do know is he misled this farm family & set them up to have many more of these calves because he didn't tell them it was genetic (recessive).

I just think it is time for horse breeders to become more open in listing **every** known defective foal sired by a stallion. I focus on the stallion because most stallions product many more offspring than most mares.

I am suspicious of stallion owners that get defensive - what things are they hiding about their stallions?

Olympic Engagement

Dec. 30, 2005, 05:10 AM

I too, i think would have put him down. becuase he was born with no eyes probably means that there is an issue with his genes, so he would not be good for breeding. Also, a blind foal is a ton of work, especially when he has never been able to see his suroundings. He would get hurt

J Swan

Dec. 30, 2005, 05:26 AM

Evalee Hunter - you know - I don't consider myself a litigious person - but if I bred my mare to a stallion whose owner intentionally concealed a material defect - I'd consider taking the matter to a competent attorney as it would be actionable.

For the same reason as your dairy cow example. Accidents happen, chemical exposure happens, and nature does make mistakes.

But QH owners know about the "Impressive" problem.

We, as horse owners, competitors and breeders - need to be responsible. Or responsibility will be dictated to us in the form of government regulation, licensing and other measures. And none of use are going to like what they come up with.

A responsible breeder will make a good faith effort to produce a good product and refrain from producing a product with known defects.

The defective foal should indeed have been humanely destroyed. But had I been the breeder - I would have worked with my veternarian to isolate the cause if possible.

Perhaps she did that and no cause could be found? I don't know - but I don't blame her for being concerned about the reputation of her facility - as the horse world is small and tongues wag.

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 30, 2005, 05:32 AM

GEnetically transmitted defects can be difficult and usually impossible to located in an individual horse. And all too often prospective breeders may jump to a conclusion that soemthing is genetic when if fact it is NOT being carried and transmitted by sire and/or dam. To properly asses genetically transmitted diseases and locate the gene involved takes years of research and a large population of individuals, it truly cannot be assessed with any accuracy in one individual. Therefore, I understand the reluctance of vets to point to genetics as the cause of a defect, as well as a reluctance in the stallion owner to admit to this. As is all too common in this country today, bad news travels VERY fast and usually is totally inaccurate. Now IF a horse was passing on a KNOWN genetic defect, and it was covered up (i.e. HYPP, SCIDS, HERDA etc) then yes, the stallion owner has the responsibility to divuldge it and if they do not then legal action is warranted. But how could one even consider legal action in the situation described in the OP. There would be ABSOLUTELY no way to prove what caused this from a genetic standpoint. People need to think before jumping to conclusions and need to examine ALL sides of an issue before stating things that are not based in fact.

J Swan

Dec. 30, 2005, 06:02 AM

I never said I'd consider legal action in this case. And I know that genetic defects can take many years of research to isolate. Actually though - genetic defects can show show up relatively quickly as breeds track pedigrees - and animals are bred often.

I'm not jumping to any conclusions at all. Destroy the foal, do your best to isolate the cause if possible, if no cause can reasonably be found - move on.

shawnee_Acres

Dec. 30, 2005, 06:10 AM

I wasn't specifically adressing you J Swan, just the general concensus that seems to be forming for this particular instance

saje

Dec. 30, 2005, 09:31 AM

I keep thinking of "Banker", by Dick Francis...

http://www.allreaders.com/Topics/Info_24365.asp

Laurierace

Dec. 30, 2005, 10:59 AM

When this happened to my foal I consulted everyone I could think of to find a cause. I talked to the eye expert at cornell after being referred from new bolton. Everyone was in agreement that is was just one of those things. My diagnosis was micro anopthamalia (sp)
I was concerned about breeding the mare again and was told that it would most likely be fine but to choose a different stallion just in case. After much agonizing over the decision I bred her to a different stud. She ruptured a uterine artery 4 days before her due date with the next foal so I will never know if I made the right choice.

Touchstone Farm

Dec. 30, 2005, 07:02 PM

shawnee acres -- agree. Until you know, how can you "blame" the stallion when, in fact, it could be the mare or something environmental. But defects like HYPP -- to not disclose that when it was known that it could be passed on is irresponsible. Caused a lot of people heartache and it could have been avoided.

Appassionato

Dec. 31, 2005, 05:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Evalee Hunter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And twosimple, I think it IS a good discussion and good that you didn't disclose the stallion's name as requested by EH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then, why is it OK to have this thread:

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/3206053911/m/584207938

naming a stallion *in the title of the thread* & asking if his descendants tend to have heart murmurs . . . but

*"everyone" thinks it would be wrong to name the stallion that is the subject of the thread I am posting on at the moment? I asked, in part, because I am curious as to whether the stallion Two Simple posts about happens to be the one I already know about who has sired 3 foals (known to me personally) with cephalic defects.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Would it be "pushing things" for her to have named the stallion? If the owners are using a a stallion that has a history of cephalic defects, the two Simple isn't the one breaking an ethics code, it's the owner. Maybe Two Simple doesn't feel like she has enough information to slander someone's stallion, if she doesn't have enough proof. Two Simple might end up the person sued IF that person came her, identified herself in the threads, over one bad foal. It probably is best that she not disclose this stallion.

ejm

Dec. 31, 2005, 06:58 AM

FWIW, the TB stallion mentioned in my previous post as the sire of a no-eyed filly sired more than 650 other foals including two Kentucky Derby winners. He stood in Lexington, the equine gossip capital of North America, and if he'd sired other foals with eye defects it certainly would have been common knowledge in the TB industry.

BeastieSlave

Dec. 31, 2005, 01:46 PM

First off, I'll admit that I skipped several pages of posts in the middle of this. I do have a great deal of current experience taking care of a blind horse.

I have a mare that is totally blind. She had one good eye and one blind when I got her in August, and had vision in both eyes a year ago. When her good eye went blind, I took her to an equine opthamologist who confirmed that she had absolutely no activity in either eyeball. One has since been removed. This mare is exceptional IMHO. She is more trusting and level-headed than your average horse and has adapted well to her blindness. She lives out in a pasture 24/7 and my daughter rides her. To see them from a distance at the trot, you would have no idea the mare is blind (I'd be happy to share a picture if anyone needs proof). But, like I said, she's special. I know if The Heifer had gone blind she would be dangerous to herself and others and most likely would have to be put down.

I would imagine that it would be very difficult for a foal born without eyes to ever have the same quality of life that a horse that loses its vision would have. The foal wouldn't have any previous life experiences to draw on.

I'm hesitant to say right off that I would put the foal down, but I'd be hard-pressed to imagine a good life for it.... Unless there was something extraordinary to change my mind, I would put it down.

pony4me

Dec. 31, 2005, 03:58 PM

I have some friends who had a blind horse. They acquired her from a lesson program when it became apparent that she was losing her sight. When they took her, she had some vision, so she was able to adapt to their pasture and barn layout. Over time, she became totally blind. They came home one day to find her dead in the pasture. Their best guess was that she ran into a tree. I would have had the foal euthanized too.

carolprudm

Dec. 31, 2005, 04:07 PM

I would also put such a foal down.

I have in the past had a cycloptic goat born and kids and lambs born with brachygnatha and a lamb with one empty eye socket. The cycloptic kid was possibly caused when the mare ate false helebore around 14 days of gestation.
The brachygnatha was probably caused by Cache Valley Virus, not reported to affect horses. I had one doe and one ewe tested, both had antibodies to the virus. It does not cause an obvious disease and once the animal has the antibodies it won't have more defective offspring. Animals can be infected at other times and not have defective offspring. I had one ewe who had triplets, one born dead, one normal and one slightly defective.
I don't know what caused the one missing eye but the skull on that side was not formed, but my vet has never thought it was hereditary..

Sparkle's Jewel

Jan. 1, 2006, 08:49 AM

A woman who lives up the street from my mother had a foal born blind.She kept it and it spooked and ran through a fence as a yearling and was hit by a truck.Very sad for the filly and financially ruined the family as they had to pay for the damamge to the truck and all the medical bills of the driver.

Annetta

Jan. 1, 2006, 12:45 PM

I too would have had this foal euthanized.

I know of one foal born last summer--it was blind at birth and would race around & around & around the stall, bouncing off the walls & hollering for its mom. Had that been my foal I may very well have euthanized it too. As it turned out, though, that particular foal had bleeding in the eyes due to a difficult delivery. As time went on the blood cleared & the foal's vision improved--after several days (I forget the exact time frame) the foal was perfectly normal. In that instance it was just as well that the owner waited it out. In the case of a foal born without eyes at all--no question at all in my mind on that one, it would be euthanized for sure.

As for Two Simple's question regarding whether all less than perfect foals should be euthanized...that is an entirely different matter IMO.

Come on; HYPP has such varying degrees of severity. The worst? Yes, I would euthanize. Those that are mildly affected? No, I wouldn't, quality of life is still there.

Same for foals born with conformational defects. I had a gelding (bought him at age 5) with very poor front leg conformation. Should he have been euthanized at birth? Certainly not. Should he have been euthanized at age 17 when he became lame from ringbone...ringbone which was directly related to his conformation faults? Yes. And he was; it was time then.

Miniature horses and dwarfism. Should all dwarfs be euthanized at birth? I would say no, & I certainly wouldn't want to suggest otherwise to anyone that has loved and cared for their dwarves. Yes, there are some that are so severely affected from birth that the only thing to do for them is to euthanize them immediately. Others become crippled and/or have breathing issues at a very young age--and yes, when they start to suffer, then it's time to let them go. still others can live happy, healthy lives for 2 years, or 4 years or longer--some live a very long time--and as long as they live comfortably, I believe in letting them do so. Sometimes of course some owners do let them suffer too long--they keep the poor little horse alive for themselves, not for the horse's sake.

I believe that the important thing in all cases is knowing when it's time to let the horse go.