• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

No place for butchers' little helpers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by LarkspurCO View Post
    Bluey, I benefit from this part of the tax code -- my property is zoned agricultural. Why would I object to that? Sorry to confuse you. I was responding to something county had said, and he replied as he often seems to do with a non sequitur. And so we got even further off-topic.



    FYI, I am referring to this (not that I object):

    http://www.publiclandsranching.org/h...scal_costs.htm

    Sorry for going off topic again!
    Did you read the article in the link you posted?
    Did you follow it to who is posting that and in such a misleading way?

    You must not have read it, or you would have realized that they lump all the BLM costs of managing those lands for ALL uses and then say the ranchers are the ones to profit from that.
    They first forget that the ranchers have as many expenses, many of those 50% are cost shared, plus the ranchers are PAYING for the permits.

    The truth is that the ranchers are PAYING for grazing and maintaining their permits and all the other they have to do for the multiple use of those lands.
    If they didn't already had private lands mixed in there, where they have to use that BLM land, they would NOT rent it at all.

    Even at what seems a low rent, compared with others, that amount is still more than they would pay somewhere else, when you count that they only get to graze a few weeks and have many, many more costs than they would have on deeded land.
    If it was not their homes and had been for many for several generations, they would not want to stay there either.

    When you look at the source of websites like that one, you have to question what they write and then you will see it IS questionable.

    Comment


    • Yes, I read the article. You'll find essentially the same data comes from the sources, including the GAO and secretary of the interior. Wasn't it you who said you couldn't trust those bean counters? Whose data do you trust then? Why don't you PM me your references and I'll check them out too.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by LarkspurCO View Post
        Yes, I read the article. You'll find essentially the same data comes from the sources, including the GAO and secretary of the interior. Wasn't it you who said you couldn't trust those bean counters? Whose data do you trust then? Why don't you PM me your references and I'll check them out too.
        If you reread my post, I didn't object to the data, but how they use it.

        Comment


        • Gawd, it's good to be back!
          DON'T MAKE ME COME DOWN THERE!!! - God

          Comment


          • It never ceases to amaze me that there are people in this world who actually live in fear that the gubmint will take away all their animals some day. Seriously, where does this fantasy come from? And to conclude that because we may cite some of the same statistics as HSUS that therefore we anti-slaughter types are actually in favor of the elimination of all forms of animal ownership, or are secretly here on COTh to spread some animla rights agenda, is an incredible and unfounded leap.

            Stop and ask yourself with the slightest bit of an open mind if it could be possible that the majority of horse owners just think horse slaughter is inhumane and unnecessary, and THAT. IS. ALL. Nothing more. No desire to stop you from showing, or riding, or owning horses. Or eating meat for that matter. It begins and ends with this one issue: horse slaughter. If you ddin't have this "oh it's all animal rights propaganda" crutch to fall back on, then what would be left for you to make your case with?

            There is no larger agenda for the majority of us. Yes there will be extremists, as there are with any issue, but ending horse slaughter is not going to give those fringe groups traction for ending all animal ownership. The "animal rights" people are a tiny minority. There's just too huge of a divide between this one issue and the entire universe of animal use to equate ending horse slaughter with the end of the animal-owning world. How can you be so paranoid?
            \"Non-violence never solved anything.\" C. Montgomery Burns

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MandyVA View Post
              It never ceases to amaze me that there are people in this world who actually live in fear that the gubmint will take away all their animals some day. Seriously, where does this fantasy come from? And to conclude that because we may cite some of the same statistics as HSUS that therefore we anti-slaughter types are actually in favor of the elimination of all forms of animal ownership, or are secretly here on COTh to spread some animla rights agenda, is an incredible and unfounded leap.

              Stop and ask yourself with the slightest bit of an open mind if it could be possible that the majority of horse owners just think horse slaughter is inhumane and unnecessary, and THAT. IS. ALL. Nothing more. No desire to stop you from showing, or riding, or owning horses. Or eating meat for that matter. It begins and ends with this one issue: horse slaughter. If you ddin't have this "oh it's all animal rights propaganda" crutch to fall back on, then what would be left for you to make your case with?

              There is no larger agenda for the majority of us. Yes there will be extremists, as there are with any issue, but ending horse slaughter is not going to give those fringe groups traction for ending all animal ownership. The "animal rights" people are a tiny minority. There's just too huge of a divide between this one issue and the entire universe of animal use to equate ending horse slaughter with the end of the animal-owning world. How can you be so paranoid?
              On the other hand, how can people be given all kinds of facts about the animal rights agendas and the power they are gathering and they so cavalierly dismiss it and call the ones presenting the data paranoid?
              Now THAT amazes me.

              Since you mention the HSUS, here is some about them. Scroll down to HSUS:

              http://www.activistcash.com/index_organizations.cfm

              ---"A True Multinational Corporation

              HSUS is a multinational conglomerate with ten regional offices in the United States and a special Hollywood Office that promotes and monitors the media’s coverage of animal-rights issues. It includes a huge web of organizations, affiliates, and subsidiaries. Some are nonprofit, tax-exempt “charities,” while others are for-profit taxable corporations, which don’t have to divulge anything about their financial dealings. "---

              Comment


              • It's not paranoia. Your personal views and goals are no doubt very different from the goals of groups like PeTA or HSUS.

                Since the only information ever posted by many of you comes almost directly from those two groups - it's not surprising that people would assume you agree with their extreme views. One thing I have noticed is the unwillingness to consider that these groups may NOT be completely truthful in what they put out, and that you are being manipulated. After all, it's only natural they'd want you to agree with them, so they'll only give you information that leads to the conclusion they want.

                HSUS still offers the pithing video as evidence of the horrors of the Mexican slaughterhouse. People continually offer a link to that video to convince others that horse slaughter is indeed inhumane.

                However, if a person points out that the pithing video is not an example of EU approved slaughter practices - the person is vilified for merely pointing out that the example is NOT an accurate representation of the entire industry.

                It's manipulation. It's careful and intentional manipulation. If the truth is so awful - it should require no manipulation. And that is what I find so unacceptable.

                The same emotional manipulation is true of BLM roundups. I understand that people love feral horses and want them protected, but I see an absolute unwillingness to understand WHY and HOW things happen the way they do. The only source of information people will rely upon - and they rely upon it exclusively - is disseminated by groups who have a larger agenda.

                I submit that you are making decisions without all the facts. And without a complete understanding of what else these groups are doing that you may not be aware of. I'm not saying any of y'all are stupid. Not at all. Nor am I asserting that if you knew what I knew you'd see things my way.

                I respect everyone's opinion on horse slaughter. Truly.

                But I ask the same in return - and in all my years posting on this BB I have NEVER - NOT ONCE - read a post from any of you that showed one bit of interest in reading about or learning of any other perspectives EXCEPT what is put out by animal rights groups.

                It's odd that y'all would accuse us of paranoia - when you guys are the ones that keep mentioning consipracies.
                Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                -Rudyard Kipling

                Comment


                • Originally posted by equinelaundry View Post

                  Those are some meaty looking horses don't you think? And oh so close to the borders.
                  OUCH. Give these people a break; a horse tagged "$5000 firm" is not going to be sold on-the-hoof for $1 a pound. No one is going to take the time or money to fatten up a $4000 baby for the dinner table.

                  ANYWAY, back to the OP's subject: God bless Richard Fields, Suffolk Downs, and Nick Zito, who will be bringing the fantastic gelding Commentator to Suffolk Downs (see below).

                  SARATOGA SPRINGS, N.Y. -- Trainer Nick Zito said the Massachusetts Handicap at Suffolk Downs could be the next stop for Commentator, the amazing 7-year-old gelding who dominated Saturday's Grade 1 Whitney Handicap at Saratoga.

                  The Massachusetts Handicap, once one of the most prestigious handicap races in the country, offers a purse of $500,000 and will be run on Sept. 20.

                  "The timing is good and the distance of a mile and one-eighth is obviously good," Zito said early Sunday morning. "I can't get a two-turn race for him at a mile and one-eighth at Belmont Park."

                  Zito also cited the recent announcement by Suffolk Downs owner Richard Fields of taking a zero tolerance stand against horse slaughter commerce at his racetrack as another reason he'd like to send Commentator to Boston for the Mass Cap.

                  "I like what Richard Fields does for horses," said Zito. "The owners of Suffolk Downs are humanitarians and are doing what they can to rescue horses, and I believe strongly in what they are trying to accomplish."

                  The Mass Cap, like the Whitney, is a Breeders' Cup Win and You're In race, giving the winner a berth in the BC Classic.
                  Last edited by InWhyCee Redux; Jul. 29, 2008, 12:54 PM.
                  "Go on, Bill — this is no place for a pony."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by county View Post
                    How many ranch horses should their be?
                    Lots and lots, IMHO. I did my first dressage test and learned to jump on ranch-bred QH/App cross. He never needed a blanket in the winter, rarely needed shoes, gained weight on hay, completely bombproof — just a great all-around horse. They need better PR too!

                    I'm leaving this thread before I get in any trouble.
                    "Go on, Bill — this is no place for a pony."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MandyVA View Post

                      Stop and ask yourself with the slightest bit of an open mind if it could be possible that the majority of horse owners just think horse slaughter is inhumane and unnecessary, and THAT. IS. ALL. Nothing more. No desire to stop you from showing, or riding, or owning horses. Or eating meat for that matter. It begins and ends with this one issue: horse slaughter. If you ddin't have this "oh it's all animal rights propaganda" crutch to fall back on, then what would be left for you to make your case with?

                      There is no larger agenda for the majority of us. Yes there will be extremists, as there are with any issue, but ending horse slaughter is not going to give those fringe groups traction for ending all animal ownership. The "animal rights" people are a tiny minority. There's just too huge of a divide between this one issue and the entire universe of animal use to equate ending horse slaughter with the end of the animal-owning world. How can you be so paranoid?
                      And therein lies your intellectual dishonesty. The AR nuts at least have intellectual honesy on their side, where as you one-issue horse worshippers get one notion in your noggins and think you have the right to force all horse owners to dance to your tune.

                      We hear a lot of crap about "the majority of horse owners feels...blah, blah, blah". Well, the "majority" can be (and often is) wrong, unfair, unconstitutional, or downright STUPID.

                      Either you believe in as much personal liberty as possible, or you believe you have the right force other people to behave as you wish. As the former, I find I must accept a great many things I do not like because the alternative is to think that, while I want the unfettered right to do this, that, and the other thing, I want to be able to force other people to do/not do whatever -- and for no better reason than because I "like" or "approve" of some things and not others for no particular reason than because I think such. I think that's the long way to say HYPOCRITE.

                      Comment


                      • Hmmm......I sincerely hope that I don't morph into the angry/bitter brigade when I get old. Black and white thinking without seeing shades of grey was something I grew out of in grade school.

                        Nothing hypocritical about wanting a humane ending for our country's horses. Trying to throw it all into some AR/libertarian/freedom fighter hodgepodge is the intellectually dishonest avenue, if not outright horseshite.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pandorasboxx View Post
                          Hmmm......I sincerely hope that I don't morph into the angry/bitter brigade when I get old. Black and white thinking without seeing shades of grey was something I grew out of in grade school.
                          Oh, really? There is nothing "grey" about wanting to ban horse slaughter. That's as damn black and white as it gets.

                          Nothing hypocritical about wanting a humane ending for our country's horses.
                          There is, however, great hypocricy in thinking YOUR definition of "humane" is THE definition.

                          Trying to throw it all into some AR/libertarian/freedom fighter hodgepodge is the intellectually dishonest avenue, if not outright horseshite.
                          No, sweetie, the HORSESHITE is in your camp of would-be tyrants who wish to insist that the entire populace worship at your Altar Of The Horse regardless of their own beliefs.
                          Last edited by greysandbays; Jul. 29, 2008, 04:27 PM. Reason: tupo....er...TYPO

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by equinelaundry View Post
                            Ma'am, please do not assume you know me or my thoughts or anything about my life. I am a landowner, a member of a farm bureau, a small business owner and a horse owner. I can assure you that you are not the only one on this board with life experiences. You may have convinced yourself that you're the only one that knows the issues but in the real world most of us know better.

                            I don't like anyone who breeds excess whether it be human or animal. Nothing made me happier than reigning in welfare for those breeding human babies. I resent subsidizing all those who do. I guess it was a figment of all our imaginations when the story broke not long ago on the landowners who were getting millions in gov't subsidies.

                            I guess it's a figment of our imaginations that my posts on this thread that point the finger directly at those that keep dropping these horses on the ground are unaware of the situation.

                            In your worldly knowledge of what appears to be everything under the sun -and since you have so much "cow sense" on farming, cattle, ranching - just how many horses does a working ranch need? How long does a ranch horse hold its value. Oops, silly me, slaughter provided value to the very end.

                            I find it fascinating and a wee bit disturbing that you continue to fight for "rights" rather than "welfare" - whether it be human or animal species no matter what facts are presented to you. You have yet to acknowledge there is a problem but are very quick to defend everyone but those wanting to make a change.

                            What motivates you?
                            A beautiful post. Amazing post. So many armchair experts get shot down by the sheer logic and elegance of this post.

                            Thank you, very much!

                            My ranch experience is limited, but the people I knew respected their stock. Didn't blindly adhere to "rights" as opposed to "welfare"

                            Seems like the obsession with "rights" have forgotten that heart goes in hand with head. If it doesn't "rights" are meaningless.

                            Comment


                            • . Champion Lodge, quite obviously, was not one of those "unwanted" horses that slaughter proponents trot out to defend the practice. He is a horse of some note that at some point was mishandled and ultimately abused through neglect, alive today only because of blind luck and the intervention of earthly angels.
                              Superb quote from the article.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by InWhyCee Redux View Post
                                OUCH. Give these people a break; a horse tagged "$5000 firm" is not going to be sold on-the-hoof for $1 a pound. No one is going to take the time or money to fatten up a $4000 baby for the dinner table.
                                With all due respect but says who? Who? There are many on this board who have had horses with huge price tags that have gotten them for free.

                                This is no different. Firm only means if there is interest and if you can go to your local auction to get one for .30/lb or less someone is going to lose. It'll be the horse. May I ask when the last time you went to an auction is? It's been over a year for me but any one of those horses could have brought a few hundred no matter what the price tag in the beginning of their life and no matter the bloodlines. Heck, you could pick up a foal, pulled from it's mom for $25.

                                BTW, I absolutely love QH's. I have a 28 year old lounging under a fan as we speak who was my babysitter - and still is.
                                "Concern for animals is a matter of taking the side of the weak against the strong, something the best people have always done." Harriet Beecher Stowe 1811-1896

                                Ponies are cool!

                                Comment


                                • Slaughter is quite an emotional topic. Me on a feel/heart level I am against it. I love my horses and can't imagine that someday my horses might end up trucked to some plant waiting to be killed. . On the other hand- rationally-there is an over-population. To me my horses are special and mean the world to me-to somonelse they are just horses. Both sides are true....
                                  I was reading an article recently where it said that due to the Olympics, Beijing has banned dog meat from menus from officially designated Olympic restaurants. It also has suggested to local consumers to not order dog meat in other restuarants during the Olympics.
                                  The problem is when it comes to animals-one person's pet is another person's livestock. My BO has sheep-rescue sheep. She spent a ton of money on one of them because he kept getting sick and finally she called the vet to put him down and bury him. It took everything I had to bite my tongue while she was going on about how sad she felt (each of her sheep has names and she loves them as I do my horses-she has horses and loves them too). But to me I grew up watching sheep/goat/chicken being slaughtered and it was actually a luxury to eat them. So for the life of me I couldn't understand why you waste good meat-lamb is not cheap at the supermarket....I am sure some guy in France or Belgium or Japan who grew up eating horsemeat probably feels the same way about me and my love for horses or dogs...
                                  It is just difficult-I love animals-but also am aware of the cycle of life and also that as humans we too are part of the cycle of life. Except horse, dog, cat and of course human, I will eat anything... But that is my view- and some dog eating Chinese may have his own list of taboo animals that he/she will not eat because he finds it abusive and the same for some horse eating European.. It is just sad though when we have something we love and yet to someonelse somewhere, they are just meat.... Just no easy solutions...
                                  But to the OPs original post, I am glad for the racetrack owner. If he is doing it for the love of horses-good for him-it is his track and as a owner, he has the right to set rules any way he sees fit. If he is doing it as a marketing ploy-entirely possible-well kudos-it worked-that is a great marketing strategy-now he has brand differentiation between his track and the other tracks -lot of good reviews-so great strategy!!!!

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by tkhawk View Post
                                    Slaughter is quite an emotional topic. Me on a feel/heart level I am against it. I love my horses and can't imagine that someday my horses might end up trucked to some plant waiting to be killed. . On the other hand- rationally-there is an over-population. To me my horses are special and mean the world to me-to somonelse they are just horses. Both sides are true....
                                    I was reading an article recently where it said that due to the Olympics, Beijing has banned dog meat from menus from officially designated Olympic restaurants. It also has suggested to local consumers to not order dog meat in other restuarants during the Olympics.
                                    The problem is when it comes to animals-one person's pet is another person's livestock. My BO has sheep-rescue sheep. She spent a ton of money on one of them because he kept getting sick and finally she called the vet to put him down and bury him. It took everything I had to bite my tongue while she was going on about how sad she felt (each of her sheep has names and she loves them as I do my horses-she has horses and loves them too). But to me I grew up watching sheep/goat/chicken being slaughtered and it was actually a luxury to eat them. So for the life of me I couldn't understand why you waste good meat-lamb is not cheap at the supermarket....I am sure some guy in France or Belgium or Japan who grew up eating horsemeat probably feels the same way about me and my love for horses or dogs...
                                    It is just difficult-I love animals-but also am aware of the cycle of life and also that as humans we too are part of the cycle of life. Except horse, dog, cat and of course human, I will eat anything... But that is my view- and some dog eating Chinese may have his own list of taboo animals that he/she will not eat because he finds it abusive and the same for some horse eating European.. It is just sad though when we have something we love and yet to someonelse somewhere, they are just meat.... Just no easy solutions...
                                    But to the OPs original post, I am glad for the racetrack owner. If he is doing it for the love of horses-good for him-it is his track and as a owner, he has the right to set rules any way he sees fit. If he is doing it as a marketing ploy-entirely possible-well kudos-it worked-that is a great marketing strategy-now he has brand differentiation between his track and the other tracks -lot of good reviews-so great strategy!!!!
                                    Now THAT is a good, sensible, rational post, giving due where it belongs and explaining in a pragmatic way that we are after all the products of our cultures, no one right or wrong, just different.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                                      Now THAT is a good, sensible, rational post, giving due where it belongs and explaining in a pragmatic way that we are after all the products of our cultures, no one right or wrong, just different.
                                      Agreed. Unfortunately, in clash of cultures where there is no inherent right or wrong (just different) there is a tendancy for the more restrictive culture to expect the right to dictate to the less restrictive on how to go on.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by greysandbays View Post
                                        Agreed. Unfortunately, in clash of cultures where there is no inherent right or wrong (just different) there is a tendancy for the more restrictive culture to expect the right to dictate to the less restrictive on how to go on.
                                        Agree. That is why these debates are not only about what to do with the unwanted horses our horse industry has, but that we do so with consideration also for what is sensible and that doesn't deny others their rights under the law.

                                        One problem is that certain groups mislead by mixing USE with ABUSE in their propaganda, since their clearly stated goal is to eventually eliminate ALL use of animals by humans.
                                        Like with the slaughter propaganda they use.

                                        Slaughter, as demonstrated by the centuries we have been conducting it and is still conducted in much of the world, is NOT inherently abusive.
                                        I have seen horses walk in there to be shot just as they walk in a vet clinic, looking around interested, some more or less worried, but definitively not in a way anyone would call abuse.
                                        Some ways people have gone about slaughter HAS been abusive, but that happens anyplace.
                                        One example, read the threads about how some rescues operate.
                                        Rescues are not inherently abusive either but, as we keep hearing, plenty have abused horses.

                                        That is why to dismiss slaughter as inherently abusive is not understanding the problem.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X