Re: RC: Re: RE: buck-o-rama

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/13/00 12:44:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time, hblmh@ptd.net 
writes:

<< Actually, Tom, I'm not surprised you don't agree, but the racing industry
 makes many of their own problems with horses. I have worked with quite a few
 different breeds, started more young horses than I care to count at this
 point, and managed barns besides having my own small breeding program. With
 all of them I have dealt with, only one would I send for dog food, he just
 was a rotten horse and no reason for it.>

Well, you've met one. I've encountered a few more. 

> That's a damn small percentage with
 over hundreds of horses of varying ages, backgrounds, and breeds.>

Sure it is, and that's probably an accurate percentage. Ridecamp is dealing 
with hundreds of horses and the first bucko-o-rama has just been mentioned. 
The horse that seems to have a hidden, arbitrary switch that says "go nuts" 
on occasion. What do you do in this case? You get rid of him without passing 
"go". Sell him to someone who thinks it's all the rider's fault, like Mary. 
Or yourself. Why don't you make an offer for this horse and report back the 
success later on? 


> And I've
 been hurt by a few, but except for a very few. most could have been avoided
 and so chalk it up to human error. Animals cannot do for themselves like
 humans, so it is up to us to be responsible in what happens to them and not
 just discard something because it is inconverient or didn't turn out the way
 it was planned.>

Most domesticated horses are bred for human use. Anyone in the breeding 
business should be acutely aware of that single most important fact. They are 
not being bred as pasture ornaments or pets, for the most part. They are for 
human USE. While responsible horsemanship is certainly a part of the 
equation, if the horse turns out not to be useful for the purpose intended, 
then it has no place on that particular owner's payroll. The owner, clearly, 
should get rid of it. 
 
> A good example happened near me last year, at the Penn National racetrack.
 The track went on strike ,and lefta lot of owners trying to find new digs
 for horses. Well, guess what? 1,000 young TB's were slated to go New Holland
 for slaughter. I helped 3 different rescue groups save around 300, another 3
 were saved by having their fees paid at the track by someone, and the other
 400 didn't make it. There was nothing wrong with these animals, young, good
 health, some were consistant money winners. Didn't matter, they got dumped.>

No one in his right mind in the racehorse business sends a profitable horse 
to the killers. And you're good evidence that not all horses that go to New 
Holland are sold for slaughter. On the other hand, of those horses "rescued", 
how many will befound useful by their new owners? Or do you have people who 
simply have a lot of land and money to support hundreds of useless animals? 
The problem with track horses is that MOST of them are dangerous, just off 
the track. If these "rescued" horses are going to people who don't know what 
to do with them, then New Holland will see them again, soon enough. 

> This is why I get angry when everyone decides glibly to just get rid of
 them.  They are the victims, we should know better. What a damn waste.>

The waste is an excess population of useless horses. The Thoroughbred 
industry alone delivers more than 60,000 babies a year to the sales for 
racing purposes. MOST of them are useless for that purpose. What the are 
useful for is putting income into the pockets of the breeders. And into the 
pockets of the trainers and vets. According to your philosophy, these horses 
are victims. 

Of the horses you are breeding yourself, what percentage turn out to be 
useful for the purposes you intended for them? Or do you breed for pasture 
ornaments and rodeos as well? My guess is that you are breeding horses to be 
used for a specific purpose, and, according to your philosophy, you're an 
accessory before the fact of the murder of the animals that don't work out. 
As are all breeders.  
 
 >You and I will never agree on this issue, so let's just drop it. Overall, I
 always respect your opinion, just not this time.>

I'm not concerned about anyone respecting my opinion. Just concerned about 
discovering the truth, wherever it lies. I tend to want to take reality 
head-on. Horses aren't Unicorns, and they're not human. Most are bred for 
specific uses, and once the halter goes on, as far as the horse is concerned, 
and as far as human sensibility is concerned, the idealized Unicorn has 
become just another using animal. 

If one feels guilt about using an animal for specific purposes, then he 
shouldn't be in the horse business. If everyone in the horse industries were 
aware that you are willing to take on the collective guilt, and the 
responsibility for "rescuing" useless horses, then I'd dare say you'd have 
more than 1,000 horses a week arriving at your farm. What would you do with 
them? 

ti
 
 
 Helga Loncosky >>