 |
RE: [RC] Natural vs neglectful (was natural horse wormers) - heidi
Kristi, I agree that most people who are into "natural" do not
usually "neglect" their horses. That said, "natural" has to be applied with a good dollop of common sense. Sadly, it can become a point of fanaticism where even though the owners do not "neglect" the horses (indeed, they spend a great deal of time and energy being "natural"), the horses are nonetheless are deprived of essential care and subjected to suffering that would be completely preventable.
I'm certainly glad to be "natural" in that my horses live out, get fresh
air and exercise as a result, and live on forage diets. They require a minimum of hoof intervention this way, and they tend to be very healthy. But to deprive them of something like deworming simply because they live in a somewhat "natural" setting would be cruel and irresponsible.
Likewise, nature does not come with nippers, rasps, or dental tools--and
when such interventions are necessary, a "natural" owner would be cruel and irresponsible not to do so.
So, while those who carry "natural" to an extreme might not be rightly
described as "neglectful," the end result to the poor horse can well be the same...
Heidi
Linda wrote: after he keeled over dead in her pasture just shortly after having been rescued from his "natural" (read: completely neglectful) owners. ____________________ 'Natural' and 'neglectful' aren't the same thing, in fact they can mean opposites, especially today, as 'going natural' often means that the owner has done their homework to help their horses be as healthy as possible. People who are into TRUE 'natural care' research the heck out of everything they do to/for their horses, which is 180 degrees from the neglect of not doing ANYTHING for their horses. Huge difference. Kristi
|