Re: [RC] [Guest] The Jim and Joe Show - Heidi Smith
>I do believe there's more than 3. I've
checked Matt's site and the number is much larger than that. Here it is
again in case you missed it.
Howard, Joe's post wasn't about Mathew's proposal--it was
about the attitude from a small handful of folks who think they just discovered
horse welfare. In case you hadn't noticed, there are a WHOLE BUNCH of
folks out there in favor of the concept of Mathew's proposal, but who also
understand that it isn't the first ever attempt at horse welfare in this sport
(in fact, not by a long shot)--in fact rather just another
fine-tuning in a long succession of efforts (many of which have already helped a
great deal with horse welfare) by a whole lot of caring, intelligent,
and outstanding people who have been working toward perfecting
welfare of horses in this sport for a long time. The objection is not to
the concept that Mathew has proposed--it is to the self-righteous attitude of a
select few who have been "dissing" previous efforts (including a fair number by
Mathew--I bet he'd be REALLY surprised at the notion that "nothing" has been
done for horse welfare by AERC in the past 30 years since he is one of the many
individuals who have helped to improve the consideration of the horse's health
and well-being for the past three-plus decades).
It is entirely possible to be very serious about horse
welfare and very serious about going forward with better means of problem
detection and still be highly offended by the statements and attitudes of
those who seem to want to negate all the good done by hundreds of people in the
past.
