Pulling the trigger, so to speak
Feb 27 2012
I was recently made aware of a news article wherein a rescue saved three horses from auction that were assuredly going to slaughter.
Apparently this rescue has formed a symbiotic relationship with an auction house to receive tips when horses come through that are ‘saveable’. They’ve been operating in this manner for over 15 years. In 2011 alone they saved approximately 80 horses from slaughter, 60 of which were rehomed. The article didn’t mention what happened to the other 20 horses, nor are they listed on the rescue’s website. Fortunately though, nothing I’ve learned about this rescue sets off any hoarder red flags so perhaps they’re being fostered or maybe the article was incorrect.
Of the three most recently rescued horses, one was a 19 year old Standardbred mare. Shortly after rescuing her, she colicked. Unfortunately she required surgery and was given (at best) a 60% chance of survival. After her surgery, this horse stayed at the veterinary hospital for about a week and brought home with her over $10,000 in vet bills – and that’s after the rescue received a discount. One of the articles covering this rescue goes on to quote them as saying they have enough feed for another two months and then they’re out.
I don’t want to condemn this rescue for making the decision to save this horse. On one hand, I think it’s great that after so many years saving horses they aren’t so jaded as to say “19? Colic? 60%? No.” And then move on to the next horse. Unfortunately, on the other hand, maybe that’s what they should have done.
Since JG and I started writing Snarky Rider and more recently, FHOTD, we’ve had the opportunity to develop a number of relationships with different rescues and have started to learn a few things – astounding, I know. It seems to me that, to be successful, a rescue needs to be run similar to a business. And here I’m defining “successful” as being able to support their rescued horses without being in a desperate scramble each month to pay the necessary and inescapable bills. It’s having a contingency fund for emergencies, having a plan and setting parameters for when to save a horse and when to let them go. Think Corporate Triage.
Let me be the first one to state that it must be next to impossible to make that life or death decision. I imagine it would be a type of hell with the potential to haunt you for the rest of your life. However, when you make the decision to start a rescue, do you not willingly take on that responsibility?
I freely admit that I don’t have any direct experience with running a rescue. (I’d like to, eventually, but I think for that to happen I need to figure out how to keep myself alive first.) This entire post and any opinions it expresses come from outside observation and what I’ve read about and discussed with rescuers. Although, I think most of Fugly’s readers are in the same boat as I am – with a few exceptions. It’ll be very interesting to get the opinions of rescue organizations and what, if anything, they would have done differently.
From all other accounts this organization is a good quality rescue that truly has the horse’s best interests at heart. The issue is: do they perhaps care too much? So much so that the objectivity required to save the ‘saveable’ horses has perhaps been compromised? Did they save one horse potentially at the expense of others already in their care? Was their decision to save this horse made with too much heart, or is that an essential component of rescuing horses that, in these hard economic times, is sometimes forgotten?
119 comments to “Pulling the trigger, so to speak”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. Not a member? Registering is free, and you do it here!
I actually find using this amount of money on one horse, in a rescue situation, not a private one, ludicrous to bordering on misuse of funds. If it is your horse, and you have the money, or are willing to mortgage your house, that is your business. When you are relying on donated funds it is a different matter. Just think for a moment how many useful, non-aged, sound riding animals go to slaughter every single day. Just think how many of them that $10,000.00 could have saved, with no work to do beyond a few rides, a few groceries and a bit of advertising.
OK, so they had no way of knowing she would colic when they bought her but, honestly, that should have been the end of it as far as I am concerned. I know people get invested in their animals, and they do stupid things like handing over their credit card as they go into the hospital (that was me, btw) but this was not the rescue’s money to use this way, it was money they had been given in trust and they have misused that trust.
They would get no donations out of me, if this is the way they use them- they have jeopardised the lives of every single horse in their care- for what?
I know this sounds hard but I have said it before and I am about to say it again….No animal was EVER harmed by being quietly euthanised.
And that is what should have happened here.
Yep.
Completely agreed.
I tend to find ‘heroic measures’ rescues where they spend thousands of dollars on an animal that 9 times out of 10 is unadoptable anyway at the end of it all very disappointing. I do understand the need to create awareness of the rescue in the media and public eye and that some high profile cases can do that. But I’d much rather see a rescue of a group of starving horses that mostly need groceries and time to become nice adoptable animals instead of a three legged, one eyed, malformed horse whose kidney fell out getting thousands spent on him. It just reeks of irresponsible behavior to me and does not actually succeed in the least in making me want to donate.
I am a huge supporter of Horse Plus Humane Society in CA, which is the only “open door” shelter for horses in the entire country. Their main mission is to keep horses out of the slaughter pipeline, even if that means all they can do is euth them. They operate in a very transparent manner, are able to see the “big picture” in rescue, and are able to make the devastatingly hard decisions to euth when necessary, even though they often take alot of flak from those who believe anything that can stand and eat a carrot should be saved. The horses are well fed and cared for and the founders and volunteers are truly committed to their well-being. I would much rather support this type of rescue than one who warehouses unadoptables indefinetly and then cant afford to care for them……
OH BS They just put a nice colt to sleep because it was cryptorchid and their vet didn’t know how to work on it, they put most stallions down because they are terrified of them . But they keep every sad sack poster child alive to raise money .Right now they are nursing a blind deaf pony with a bad leg for every penny he can make them. Their euth rate is over 60% they know nothing about care or feeding or training . They have 4 people living off donations without jobs and raise ridiculous amounts of money only to turn around and put everything to sleep.
And lets not forget this huge fiasco
Published November 9, 2010
“Rescue & Horse Trader Collude to Defraud Donors & Take Advantage of Horse Owners”
THE MYTH
NorCal Equine Rescue (a.k.a. Horse Plus Humane) was intercepting a kill buyer’s double decker load of horses on route to a Mexican slaughter plant.
From NorCal’s email to donors: “This morning I got a call from the kb that has been bringing us horses. He said that if we want, that we can purchase 38-40 horses (a double decker full) straight from the slaughter pipeline. We can purchase the entire load, or none at all. It’s an all or nothing deal. We absolutely must raise $10,000 for the rescue and initial care by Monday October 11th to save these horses. I know this is huge, but I also know we can count on you and together we can make this happen. This is one slaughter pipeline load of horses that will be safe thanks to you, our supporters. If everyone does what they can, then this will happen. Even $10 helps, it all adds up.”
“I am very excited about this opportunity. In all my years of rescue, I have never heard of a slaughter truck load of horsesbeing offered for a very reasonable price like this. Let’s make history!”
If this were true, Jason & Tawnee Preisner, soon-to-be humane officers, should have reported this illegal activity (based on the laws below). Otherwise, they are effectively aiding and abetting a criminal, and rewarding him with a profit.
THE REALITY
NorCal placed an order with a low-end horse trader for a truck load of horses (so they could orchestrate a big “save” and look like heroes). The horse trader placed ads on CraigsList (see ads below) to solicit and acquire horses to meet their request, and set about gathering them up. When contacted, the horse trader openly admitted that he was taking horses to NorCal. When asked if he was the “kill buyer” they referred to in their blog/emails he said NorCal could call him whatever they wanted, whatever “worked” for them. He also stated that he had been doing this type of thing for them for awhile.
Here are the photos of his trailer at his house and on their blog
http://www.flickr.com/photos/norcals_kb
Here are his ads
Horses Wanted
Original URL: http://redding.craigslist.org/grd/1981834655.html
Date: 2010-09-30, 10:47AM
Horses wanted, Young horses, Old horses & Problem horses, Unwanted horse, We will try to rehome any horse that is either to old or wild to be rehomed. Horses unable to be re-trained or started may be sent to a local horse rescue
Call David
530-366-1385
Location: Red Bluff
Horses Wanted – $100 (Red Bluff)
Date: 2010-09-23, 11:39AM PDT
Horses Wanted!! Young horses, Old horses, Problem horses, Trained or unbroke. NO HORSE IS SENT TO SLAUGHTER!!! We train and rehome most horses. If a horse is not able to be re-homed we have a working relationship with a rescue sanctuary for all un-adoptable horses.
530-366-1385 or 209-622-8993
Location: Red Bluff
You will also see his letter of response under the name NOT A KILL BUYER
http://www.flickr.com/photos/norcals_kb/5102670997/
Not A Killer Horse Buyer (2 weeks ago)
To whom it may concern @ Horse welfare. It has come to our attention that the horse world workings of David McGrath and Sis Sweeten has come under serious scrutiny and has been published in several places. Statements have been made stating that we are not properly representing our intentions. when that is the farthest thing from the truth. The truth of the matter is that these horses are rescued from the slaughter pipe line and need good homes and some may even need to be euthanized.
“From The Horses Mouth !!!” I David McGrath have traded horses for over FORTY + years. I personally saved horses @ northern California slaughter houses long before it was illegal to kill horses in the united States. in 1973 a killer horse base price was only two cents a lb. Back then you could buy any horse for 35.00. I would buy 9 horses a week out of the slaughter houses to be re homed. I would appreciate any other communication that you feel needs to be publicized about me or my partner you contact us and get the facts right FIRST!! We will gladly and honestly answer any questions you have and then you can print the truth about us.
FACTS:
1. We do not work for any rescue.
2. We do associate with 3 California Rescues
3. We do not advocate any horse slaughter, But accept is a last resort!
4. A few horses from our adds have been sent to rescues(less than10), because of negative publicity. Horse owners/buyers are scared form the dishonest publicity we have already received.
5. Horses are sent from Washington, Oregon & California weekly to the receiving stations in New Mexico & Texas. Currently as of today….We have another 18 horses that need good homes. This group of horses started in Hermiston Oregon as 30 horses originally, was hauled to New Mexico, Rejected and returned to California on an empty truck. It doesn’t make financial sense to you, but as a man with a forty year record of good horse trading and honor among the horse community, I can get a lot done with a phone call and my word to pay the trucking bill.
6. We provide stock for California Chariadas,(Mexican Rodeo)specifically bucking horses and cattle. Mexican rodeo officials have attempted arrangements for our stock to be imported to Mexico so we have a direct connection with the Mexican export/import officials.
7. With over a year relationship with Horse Plus. The young couple are wise, fair and to be commended for there efforts
8. We Love Horses as much or more then most…We Eat, Breath, Sleep and live horses, not as a hobby but as a way of life!!
Please take the time to really consider all the information that I have given you and if you still have questions feel free to contact me directly and I would love to visit with you. I am in hopes that you might know of a few good homes for these horses.
Sincerely,
David McGrath
Sis Sweeten
530-366-1385
This man is not well respected in the horse industry , he is well known as a low end trader and supplier to Mexican rodeos- these rodeos are outlawed in California because they are known for their cruelty to animals which may explain the many injuries on horses he sold to the rescue. horse tripping
NorCal was promoting these horses as being slaughter bound, to play on donors’ emotions and quickly/easily raise $10,000.
These horses were not slaughter bound. There were no auction tags or green federal tags on these horses. They can not cross the border for slaughter without green federal tags. There is no border crossing point in CA for slaughter horses (closest ones are in TX & NM). Mexico did not “reject” these horses. They were never sitting at the border. It is utter nonsense to believe a buyer would take a load of 38-40 horses all the way to the Mexican border, and then bring ½ the load all the way back up to N.CA
These horses were not in the slaughter pipeline, they were in barns and pastures at private homes. The owners were enticed to give their horses to an “agent” for the rescue because it saved them from paying NorCal to take their horse – $150 surrender fee, $25 per hour handling fee, and $1 per mile transport costs (see their surrender policy below).
Surrender Policies -
We are an open door facility, any horse is welcome to be surrendered. The surrender fee is $150, which helps provide for their initial care. You are welcome to surrender your horse at the shelter during normal business hours, or you may contact us to make other arrangements.
We will be glad to arrange transportation of your horse to the shelter. The nominal transporting fee to help cover the fuel expenses is $1.00 a mile, round trip from our shelter. If your horse is not easily loaded (ie, in a large open pasture, not trained to load, etc) there is a $25 per hour loading fee beyond the first hour. Please contact us to arrange transportation.
NorCal has approximately a 60-70% euthanasia rate. Based on that statistic, many of these “saved” horses will likely be euthanized. Since when do we kill animals to save them? Based on CA Civil Code, we don’t (see below).
California Civil Code
1834.4. (a) It is the policy of the state that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home.
Adoptable animals include only those animals eight weeks of age or older that, at or subsequent to the time the animal is impounded or
otherwise taken into possession, have manifested no sign of a behavioral or temperamental defect that could pose a health or safety
risk or otherwise make the animal unsuitable for placement as a pet, and have manifested no sign of disease, injury, orcongenital or
hereditary condition that adversely affects the health of the animal or that is likely to adversely affect the animal ‘ s health in the future.
(b) It is the policy of the state that no treatable animal should be euthanized. A treatable animal shall include any animal that is
not adoptable but that could become adoptable with reasonable efforts. This subdivision, by itself, shall not be the basis of
liability for damages regarCalifornia euthanasia laws.
Business and Profession Code, Section 4827(d), and in the California Code of Regulations, Section 2039.
If the majority of the horses are euthanized, very little of the funds raised for their “care” will actually be needed. So NorCal adds quite a bit of fraudulently gained funds to their coffers.
They also probably used very little of the funds raised for purchasing the horses… Previously, NorCal paid this horse trader $100/horse (per their blog), but he stated that there is no “set fee”. He only asks for a donation to cover his fuel and other costs. After all, he is getting many of them for free, from owners who believe they will be rehomed or taken to a rescue to be adopted out or kept in sanctuary. He could conceivably be making 100% pure profit. And how much is NorCal making on the transaction? The 19 equines they actually ended up with likely cost them $2,000 or less.
NorCal showed no more compassion for these horses than the buyer. They had supposedly been on the road for hours, or possibly even days, yet NorCal loaded these tired, weak horses onto their trailers without so much as a drink of water or bite to eat. They also loaded a critically injured horse on the trailer, when he should have had immediate vet attention. It was cruel and abusive to jam him into a trailer with others, when he clearly could not stand, and obviously had a serious injury (broken leg).
So, what makes this arrangement any different than a typical slaughter plant purchase? A load of horses was “contracted” for. The buyer & seller both make $ and the horses end up dead.
This entire scheme is a fraud, designed to rip off donors and fill their coffers. Additionally, it will garner NorCal’s attention-hungry founder some coveted media attention and public adoration. It was probably a twisted PR event to launch their new name – Horse Plus Humane.
Healthy adoptable horses have been put down to make room for sad horses who will cause emotional upset and get donations. Horses that are healthy have been put down at alarming numbers over 30 a month in some months.
California law allows Humane Officers to put down animals without a vet explaining why the change to Horse Plus Humane Society and classes on euthanasia. It isn’t about catching bad guys. They are the bad guys.
When they got caught in their little scheme they left the killbuyer with the rest of their order causing him to place this post asking $125 for each horse. Mr Well Respected Horseperson couldn’t see how badly the horses needed vet care or even bother to wash a wound or feed them. He copied NorCal/Horse Plus’ tactics and posted sad pictures without care and asking for money.
These horses should have never been hauled let alone kept for days while he tried to get money and shame on the rescue for leavign them in his care because they were too chicken to finish their unethical deal.
Sad and tragic these horses suffered far longer than needed because of money
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55189426@N02/
Enough it is time to stop them from becoming Officers and close this fake rescue down.
dottheis, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you should present it as such rather than claiming it to be factual. That cryptorchid colt was euthed because of the cost and questionable outcome of the surgery, not the ability of the vet. And that blind and deaf baby is alive not to raise funds, but because it may be adoptable if the vet gives a thumbs up on quality of life. Sheesh, if they euthed it too how many people would complain it wasnt given a chance?
Regarding euthanasia, from Horse Plus’s recently published statistics. “In 2011 they rescued 366 animals, mostly horses. We had 80 owner surrendered euthanasias, 47 equines were euthed due to illness, chronic pain, disease or injury. 50 equines were euthanized due to old age or poor quality of life. 14 equines were euthed to to lack of adoptive homes and 10 animals passed away naturally. Using the industry-standard assessment of euthanasia rate (healthy animals euthed due to lack of adoptive homes after a lengthy stay at the shelter) we only had less than a 4% euthanasia rate. The industry standard in dog and cat shelters is 40-60%.
Its real easy to sit behind a computer and sling all kinds of accusations and twist situations to fit ones personal agenda. I suggest that with any rescue, if one has any questions that they personally check them out and ask lots of questions. Dont rely on other peoples interpretations of events. Decide for yourself whether their policies are acceptable and whether they are worth your support. There isnt a single rescue org. on this planet that doesnt have its critics.
By the way, Jason and Tawnee have never claimed to be humane officers. They have stated they took the training course in order to fully know the laws regarding animal welfare.
No it was ON their own website that they claimed to be humane officers. They had to remove it along with the false claims to be sponsered by the AQHA.
It isn’t opinion when you take it from their own website, blogs and facebook posts.
From your statements you have never been there , or maybe you have but real horsepeople walk away disgusted Follow the horses that come in and disappear along with the money raised for the care that is left over once they put the animal down. Explain how all those adults and children can live without a single job among them .
PS a lengthy stay is your opinion , most horse people don’t expect to find a home for a horse in a week or a month especially when they don’t know anything about the animal other than it cost more to feed than put to sleep
Yankee- have you ever personally visited their facilities? Also, yes, they did claim to be Humane Officers on their web site until they were called on it and changed the wording.
Thank you for taking the time to write so much, so lucidly.
Having just made the decision to euthanize my elderly ailing pony, i can say with absolute certainty that rescue or not, the overextension of financial resources should be a high priority factor. How can you jeopardize food and quality care for so many others that you have assumed responsibility for? A horse that was going to slaughter now could have a kind and peaceful end, and you’d have the resources to save another from slaughter. If that is what motivates you, saving a horse from slaughter, then that would be the consistent path. Just my 2 cents. But then again, who are we to put ourselves in another’s shoes, when we sometimes have difficulty walking in our own.
I thin we can put ourselves in another’s shoes when we’re the ones making the donations that help fund some of the shoes for those horses.
Except there is nothing,not one thing, that is kind or peaceful about how they slaughter horses, It’s savage brutal,antiquated and a panic-stricken painful death .
I suspect you misread Barefooter’s comment.
“A horse that was going to slaughter now could have a kind and peaceful end, and you’d have the resources to save another from slaughter.”
Meaning the horse that -otherwise- would have gone to slaughter can have a kind euthanasia instead, and you’d have the money to save another horse for slaughter.
Not that slaughter is kind and peaceful.
This is something I’ve thought of a lot, since I’d like to work in rescue at least small scale once I have a career and am out of grad school. Our opinions are very similar- I feel that, unfortunately, there are too many good horses needing care not to practice some sort of triage. Of course, call me jaded, but People Helping Horses has been saying they are running out of money and can’t buy hay for the last decade (not comparing the two rescues, just hoping they both use dramatic fundraising ploys).
Rescues do have the right to take on these sad cases, though it isn’t what I would personally do. SAFE, for example, is a great rescue I have visited personally (and have three former SAFE horses at my barn), but I still disagree with their decision to take on Strider, a horse that was severely burned in a barn fire, whose owner then could not afford his veterinary care. The horse has been there months and months, enduring daily debriding of his wounds, and just recently, skin grafts. It is unlikely he will ever be ridden again, since the wounds are on his back. SAFE is constantly mentioning him, but in my opinion it would have been kinder to put him down after the fire last year. This is just my opinion though, and since SAFE has the funds to take on these extreme cases and not lose the farm, they have a right to do as they please.
That is where the line is, I think. If a rescue has a very limited budget, it seems as though they should stick to horses that just need TLC, and unfortunately, just provide a kind end to the worst cases. If a rescue has large funds, and the donations are coming in for just that purpose, they can make the choice for medical treatment, assuming it won’t be unduly unfair to the animal (I am not in favor of prosthetics for horses!). In some cases, people will only donate to help with these extreme cases (it’s like how everyone wanted to adopt a Hurricane Katrina dog, but no one would take a normal shelter dog), and fair enough, if the animal’s pain can be managed. You could argue that the better funded rescues could save even more animals if they didn’t take the hard cases, but I think that falls into the jaded category you mentioned. I think that might be the policy I would take if I ran a rescue, but I won’t fault a rescue for spending money they actually have on a hard-luck case, as long as they are making the horse suffer unduly.
Ack, that is obviously meant to say “as long as they AREN’T making the horse suffer unduly.” Because what I wrote would be cruel. Lol, 7am is not kind to me.
One has to bear in mind that sometimes rescues have to have a “poster boy” for donations, so to speak. I have no idea at the moment what SAFE is doing with the burned horse, but some rescues would want to have a drastic case to point at to drive donations. Horses standing in a field grazing quietly do not tug at John Q. Public’s heartstrings. I have heard “from the horse’s mouth”, so to speak, from one rescue that they really go for the cases that bring the media out, because then the donations from people, as well as free services from vets and farriers, as well as hay and feed doantions, really flow freely when that happens.
Absolutely agree. We have a jar for the GA Dept of Ag Equine Impound at my job (TSC) and the picture on the front of it is a plain sorrel horse (looks like a gelding but I have no idea) that’s about a 1.5 on the scale. Count every rib, facial bones prominent. 95% of the people I see donating money in the jar goes “poor horsie, how could anyone do that?” or something to that effect. The jar has been there since before I got my job last May, and that same horse is probably cruising around someone’s pasture, fat and sassy, thanks to the efforts of the GA Equine Impound volunteers and public donations. They don’t do a lot of advertising and “heartstring pulling” but that one photo garners a couple hundred dollars a year for them, from our store alone. He’s the “poster horse” for the donations at work anyway, and I’ll bet that’s not the only jar that sports his picture.
Just sayin’
I’ve been a long-time critic of this very practice. I was critical here, when Fugly posted about a rescued TB stallion (Champagne Til Dawn) that ended up consuming many thousands of dollars in vet care etc. before being euthanized a month or so later. IMHO, every rescue needs to keep a wall of photos of the ones they Did Not Have The Funds To Rescue, the ones who got on the truck to slaughter. They need to remember that every time they approve $$$$ in vet bills for one horse, that’s 10 or 100 others that will end up being shipped down the road. They need to make sure that they don’t allocate $$$$ for vet bills for a horse with a very poor chance of returning to soundness, being adopted, moving on and making room to take another horse off the truck. If there’s a SINGLE donor who is willing to put up the money to pay for the extraordinary expenses, then let that donor sponsor the horse – paying ALL the bills (vet, care, etc.). BUT if that donor has money to sponsor to spend $$$$ on a horse with a risky outcome, consider asking that donor to put forth the money towards rescuing 10+ others with a much better chance of a good outcome.
It is odd that I don’t remember Champagne til Dawn’s expenses being in the thousands of dollars. Was an amount published some place that I missed? He was purchased at an auction, had radiographs of his feet done (twice I think), a set of special shoes and a month of boarding. How does that add up to thousands? Furthermore, the horse’s care was paid for by a private party. It wasn’t a rescue that was paying the bills. It has been several years since this horse was euthanized, so correct me if I’m wrong.
I agree that this horse would have been better off euthanized earlier rather than later (like years earlier before he developed laminitis). However, let’s get the facts straight before condemning something.
jcdil….since I am the person who paid the bills for champagne til dawn, and if we had been able to give him good quality of life, would have brought him home…..I can tell you it was NOT thousands of dollars.
Don’t know where you got that info, but it isn’t true
If it was my rescue, I would not have chosen surgery. I would have had the vet do anything possible to save her without surgery, if surgery was the only option I would have put her down.
I say that because of her age, because of the odds of colic surgery working and because of the cost of the surgery.
I think about 50% of horses survive the surgery, but even they have more problems down the line so if I adopted the horse out I would be sticking the adopter with future problems.
I would be devastated but at least her absence would create space for another.
Horse Plus Humane Society has also been doing low cost gelding and euthansia clinics for the past couple years..another thumbs up in my book.
A rescue has the right to make its own decisions… but should also have the responsibility to keep funds set aside for vet emergencies. I do not think it’s hard-hearted at all to have an older horse with colic put down and have several friend with “DNR” orders at their vets, giving the vet permission to euthanize an older horse rather than take extraordinary measures to save it. And they’ve talked this over with the vet before anything happens, and have vets who are willing to put down a horse without arguing with the owners about it.
I suppose it also depends on the rescue’s focus. Given what people want — sound, sane horses with good basic training — I am more supportive of rescues who are “hard hearted” enough to look at the market and do triage in favor of adoptable horses. The number of companion-only homes is small and is decreasing.
I agree this must have been a hard decision to make for an organization that is, at it’s core, devoted to saving horses. Reputable rescuers want nothing but the best for their rescues, and top notch medical care is included. However, I think this rescue’s decision to go ahead with life-saving surgery was a luxury that they could not afford. The concept of a budget and spending within your means is not limited to rescue or even just the horse world, but is what financial responsibility is all about!
When I had my horse as a teenager, my parents were kind enough to pick up the majority of his bills. However, even as a kid I knew that as far as my parent’s budget was concerned, a surgical colic was going to be euthanasia, 100% of the time. I was ok with that, though, because I understood my parents’ financial limits and how they had other, more important bills like the mortgage that had to come first. I would have been devastated if my horse had to be euthanized, but I thank my parents for the cold, hard knowledge that life isn’t fair, and things you feel are essential or necessary are luxuries when you can’t afford them. I would KILL to have another horse and would consider a horse essential to my happiness, but at this time in my life and with my budget, I can’t afford that kind of luxury and I’m ok with it.
I think perhaps this rescue thought first with the heart and forgot the principal idea of financial responsibility. Hopefully the rest of the horses depending on them don’t have to suffer for a decision of the heart and not the brain.
Here is the core of the matter: If I, as a private owner, could not handle a medical emergency (such as colic surgery) without borrowing money, begging for help from others, endangering the welfare of my family and other animals, risking not being able to make a mortgage payment, then I have to choose euthanasia. A rescue quite frankly does not have the right to use donated funds in this manner. If that mare had still been a valued broodmare, perfectly cared for at a standardbred breeding farm — she would have been euthanized.
We all must face financial realities. So they saved the horse. Yay. HOW MANY HORSES COULD THEY HAVE SAVED FOR THE COST OF THE SURGERY? 10? 20? 50? Which is the more responsible use of the DONORS’ money?
I cannot donate to a rescue who treats the horses like a human being brought into the ER, extreme measures, etc. That’s not a valid use of my money, not when it can do more good somewhere else.
I’d go a step further. Extreme measures aren’t always warranted on humans either. I say this as part of a family that bankrupted itself so that we could try absolutely everything on earth and have more time with my mother who died of cancer. The last of those three years was hell on earth, for both my father and my mother, and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. Years of financial recovery after a horrible loss like that don’t dull the pain, they exacerbate it, especially if the money doesn’t go to buying some measure of quality of life.
I know it’s a very controversial topic. The experience has just taught me to be militantly committed to quality of life, for humans as well as animals.
I couldn’t agree more. I never, ever want to be a burden to anyone while I’m withering away to nothing. I’ve told everyone to leave me at home, get some good painkillers and double-dose me when my time is near. Np one here gets out alive regardless of how hard we try. Quality will always be more important to me than quantity. Sorry for your loss, cancer is heartbreaking for all those involved.
I read a very good article in a medical magazine (a HUMAN doctor’s magazine) that essentially said that dogs get a better deal from vets than people do from their doctors. A vet will tell you Fifi’s quality of life will be impacted, that she’s going to lose bowel control, and she won’t be able to walk more than a few feet, and that she might snap because she won’t remember you; then everyone agrees to put her down. Your family physician won’t do that but will aim for keeping the patient alive what ever; the reason being the human may get some strange benefit from suffering a little more before they die. Now, a dog can enjoy a couch life but a horse cannot, running is its life.
Exactly. We need a law that allows for the same sort of mercy for humans. Advance directives just don’t cover it.
We are working on it. At the moment there is one clinic in Switzerland and, I think, one in Holland, where it is legal, although the person themselves have to administer the drugs, it is still not legal for anyone else to do it, so if you, for example, have crippling arthritis you have to die sooner than you would have done otherwise, as you have to be capable of administering the drugs to yourself. This is death with dignity,( http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/ )there is a website, but it is till far from perfect. For a start I want to die in my own house (and I shall!) and I do not want anyone else to suffer as a result of my decision, (and they will not) but it is not legal, and if anyone were to choose to stay with me they could be charged with accessory to murder!!!
Crazy- you can be prosecuted for not euthanisng a suffering animal, and prosecuted for euthanising a naked ape…..
Yup! And the worst part is that deep inside, many of the physicians are shaking their head and wishing they could really help the patient stop suffering. My husband is a family physician and he, like many of his acquaintances in the medical field, would love for some of the politics to become absent so that quality of life could become paramount, but as long as lawsuits, politicians and HMOs are part of the equation, it’s all muddied. Everyone who has ever worried about this should have a living will — your doctor will be grateful too!
This is something I often think about whenever I hear accounts like these or watch some of the shows on Animal Planet that focus on rescue work. Personally I think that while it is great to want to save all of the rescues it is necessary to try to remember that helping the most with the limited resources is the most important thing in making some of these life and death decisions. It is heart breaking but I feel it is better to help give a suffering animal a quick and dignified death and have money to help 10 more healthy animals than to save one with heroic measures resulting in an animal that might be “special needs” of limited use and difficult to adopt out.
It isn’t that I don’t think each life is worthy just that sometimes hard choices must be made because of economic realities.
It’s a hard place to be when you have to “play god” with another life. In my opinion, I would look at most cases and see where does the animal stand on its quality of life. There are times in life where you have to man up and put your heart aside and figure out what is best for this animal. To me at 19, the horse has lived her life the best she could and due to her condition this probably wont be the first time she colichs to point of needing $10,000 surgery and in that case I would put her down. In my opinion her poor quality of life out ways the cost to keep her alive. I know it sounds heartless and cruel but why continue to make the animal suffer because they pull on you heart strings?
My family is going through this right now with our family dog. She’s pretty high up there in the doggy years and her arthritis is so bad in her hips she needs daily medication to give her the reliefe to go potty outside but she’s now limited to staying on the main floor of the house. She can’t go down stairs anymore and can’t go for her usual jog everyday. So we’ve been asking ourselves how long are we going to pump drugs into our family dog just to keep her around longer? It’s a sad place to be but it hurts me more to watch my dog be in pain then it is to see her go peacefully to the other side.
I do not think of this kind of “hard decision-making” as “playing God.” It is, instead, doing as the Bible says, Being a good steward.
Good stewardship in this case means making the tough decision to send the animal on its way because despite everything, the quality of that animal’s life is not worth the $10K (or whatever amount) spent to fix whatever was the issue. The horse is still 19 years old and probably of very little value as an adoptable–and though the surgery was a success, the horse will never be the same again. The only winner (and this is not snark) is the vet who did the surgery.
I’ve made that VERY difficult decision more times than I can count, but I like to believe that I have done the right thing. The animal is no longer suffering, and we will meet again someday.
With that in mind, and speaking now for the rescue: Starting a rescue is not something to be taken lightly. You have to have a business plan, and you have to have a reserve fund to tide you over during downturns in the economy or in the case of illness or injury–your own or any of the animals that is younger and “salvageable.” This money should not be spent without much debate and consideration, which is why having a board of directors is also a very good thing. The board will take the decision out of your hands if you tend to think with your HEART first instead of like a businessman or woman — and if you THINK about it, running a rescue IS like running a (nonprofit) business.
If you have limited resources/”discretionary income” and you know that donations aren’t like a regular paycheck, you must do as someone above recommended, sort of a “business triage.” Where should the dollars be spent so they will do the most good?
A gal I know runs a rescue, and while her heart is in the right place and she has secured foster and permanent homes for a number of horses, she is always calling out for last-minute donations or volunteers to keep things running. She has had a series of health problems herself, but I feel like she’s not making wise decisions when it comes to accepting rescues. She is accepting everything that comes her way. Many of the horses she has rescued will never be placed, even as pasture pals. It would be kinder for them and certainly more efficient for the rescue if she were a good steward to the ones she CAN help and send the others over the Bridge.
It sounds heartless and cruel, I know. But as I said, the bottom line should be the determinant factor. How can I take these X dollars and use them to to help the most horses? It’s more than feeding them. It’s adequate fencing, housing, farriery, veterinary, and supplements for those who need them. And THAT adds up to a lot of dollars per equine.
I know myself very well. I could not go to the feedlot or auction house and pick out a horse or two to buy, leaving others there to the fate that I know perfectly well awaits them. I stay away because I KNOW I would want to bring them all home. However, when it comes to making tough decisions and being a good steward to the animals in my care, I can sign the release form at the vet and dispatch them if that is what the vet recommends. My vet is a terrific man and knows what to recommend, for the good of the animal he’s treating as well as for the others in my care.
Just play Devil’s Advocate here. How is letting one’s life live or die not “playing God?” A horse may be an animal but it has the same feelings as humans do. How is this any different from pulling the plug on a patient declared brain dead and euthanizing a horse that has a 60% chance of not surviving surgery? See what I’m saying? Either way you are choosing to let a life continue on or die. That’s where I stand to see where the quality of life may be for each individual case.
Stewardship is an ethic that embodies responsible planning and management of resources. In this case there was none of this. This rescue did not show any responsible planning or proper management of their resources. Because of their lack of responsible planning, the other horses will soon suffer from their actions.
Now, with stewardship in the bible, according the Christian belief, stewardship refers to the people acknowledging that all things in this world belong to God and you are to be held accountable to God for the care and use of those possessions. These people may have taken action to save one life at a high cost but in return has jeopardized the care of many other horses that need their help. So in retrospect they will now be held accountable for the lives they chose to put at risk for this one horse.
I’m not saying there is anything wrong with putting an animal down or pulling the plug on the loved one but it still doesn’t take away the difficulty of the decision. It really comes down to quality of life and would you rather let someone or something suffer for your own emotional benefit?
Continuing the Devil’s Advocate theme, why is intervention to prevent a natural death also not “playing God”? Death is nature’s outcome to life, and any measures we take to prevent or postpone that inevitability is, in fact, playing God. Compassion impels us to ease the pain of death, ergo euthanasia. In this case, we are not inflicting death… just making it less prolonged, and therefore more easily endured.
I could not agree with you more. Continueing to play Devil’s Advocate, simply anything we do medically to prevent death, prolong life or end life is pretty much “playing God.” If we let nature take its toll the outcome would have been much different. But letting nature take its toll and our compassion for life are two combating elements to life which brings us to the self-inflicted battle of spending $10K to save a life or to save many lives.
It’s a shame that it’s against the law to extend that same compassion to humans. Animals are lucky in this regard.
agreed….
Absolutely agree.
You are very fortunate to have a vet you can trust, you have a sound mind and I agree with you,
I’m really sorry about your dog. My old chow had severe arthritis at the end, and the pills did offer her relief for the last year, but the medication is also really hard on their bodies. Finally, her organs shut down from all the pills. I wish I had put her down about three days earlier than I had, and I will always regret that, since trying to keep her going denied her a peaceful end. I had no way of knowing what was going to happen, but I now know that it would always be better to let go a week too soon than a day too late. The most important thing is they know they are loved, and that you let them go when the time is right. Again, I’m really sorry about your dog.
Thank you LuckChance for the condolences. I’m sorry for your loss as well. It will be a very hard day when we have to put her down and I hope we don’t get to the point where the medication is killing her instead of helping her. You’re the second person I’ve heard from who’s dog’s organs shut down from arthritis medication. Since I don’t live at home anymore I can’t be there everyday to watch her go down hill. I just hope my parents have it in their hearts to put to sleep before any of that happens to her.
Ride like the Wind,
Please convince your parents to let their dog go. I don’t understand why people force animals to live suffering, when we can give them the final gift of no more pain.
Everyday that dog wakes up feeling worse, what are they waiting for?
As owners, we have to be ready to replace their pain with our own… that’s what loving an animals is about.
Horselover,
Trust me, I’ve been trying to convince them for 6 months now. Every time I go visit them and see Sadie (our dog) looking worse than the last time I saw her I bring it up. But my step mom is convinced she still has a few years left in her and doesn’t think her hips are bothering her now that she’s on the medication. I just end up shaking my head and hoping my childhood dog doesn’t feel pain and suffering when its her time to go.
This may shock you, but…..
in the same position with my Mother’s cat, I went round when they were out for the day, took her and had her put down, then laid her out under the lilac bush, in the sun. My Mother was happy, the cat was happy, everyone was happy….
I am not shocked, and I think you are a heroine for doing that! I have had a couple of experiences that make me think that way.
My mother did something similar. She took my ailing childhood dog to the vet to be put to sleep one day, without telling anyone in advance. She had actually scheduled a euth appointment a few weeks earlier, and we all cried ouselves sick and hardly slept the night before and carried on so much in general that she cancelled it. Then she just slipped off one day and did it. I came home from school to find no doggie, and I. Was. Furious. – but now I’m grateful. We had made our goodbyes already, and I finally realized she was really very brave and thoughtful to do it that way, and spare us.
On the other hand, when I was at college my boyfriend’s mother called him to tell him she was planning to put his dog down the following Monday. He could come home for the weekend if he liked, to say goodbye. So we went and spent the whole weekend weeping over poor Angus. She then called him Monday afternoon with all the gory details, including how they’d brought the dead doggie home tied to the rack on top of their station wagon because they didn’t want his body in the car upsetting the other dogs. How special! :-/ Boy, was I pissed at her. He knew his beloved dog was old and sick. Why not just call and tell him the poor thing had expired in his sleep, end of story? BF still would have been terribly sad but could have dealt with it. And why even tell him about the final car ride? (Yes, I know, it reminds me of National Lampoon’s “Vacation” now, too, but at the time it sucked)
I think you did exactly the right thing! However, I bet with all the privacy laws we’ve got here in the US now RideLikeTheWind couldn’t even do that if she wanted to…
I am not shocked one bit and trust me if that was an option I would do it! Today! But my parents live in a very up tight neighborhood where the HOA is called if your grass turns too brown in the summer or you have a bush out of place. Yea, one of those types. No need to have security in their neighborhood cause their house is surrounded by nosey neighbors who have no issue gossiping about your life and calling your parents to tell them they’ve seen you at the local Subway with 6 boys and it is their opinion they don’t feel it is appropriate for a lady to surround herself with so many young men. *sigh* All I would have to do is leave with the dog and never come back and my cover would be blown, like the testing of an atom bomb!
I don’t consider this a difficult decision – for my animals QUALITY of life will always be the priority over QUANTITY. I will never make my animals suffer, and yes, when they live with chronic pain they ARE suffering, so that I can enjoy one more day with them. I would much rather remember my pets as the happy, healthy animals that they are for the majority of their life, than to have our final days together be full of pain and misery.
I would not have approved colic surgery for a 19 year old horse. In fact, I am not sure I would approve colic surgery for a younger horse unless I could get better odds than 50%. It isn’t just about the money either – it goes back to the quality of life issue. Death is not a horrible end that we should be terrified of to the point we are willing to torture another living being to avoid. It is a natural part of life and a good option to end suffering.
They should have let the mare go. Personally, I wouldn’t pay that for my own beloved babies.
10K is a lot of feed! Never mind the number of other horses that might have been saved with the money, it seems like a misalignment of priorities that could be jeopardizing the future of the entire operation, if they really only have feed for two more months!
I agree that by saving this one horse, the “opportunity cost” of saving more is lost. Is this horse worth the lives of lets say 6 more that could have been rescued with that money? From a business perspective I would say without a doubt it was a bad decision… from a pet owners perspective I say it was the only decision. Often we do things for our animals that seems silly to non-animal people out there. When our free bunny gets sick we pay for the overpriced surgery and eat mac n cheese all month. There is no rationalizing it because when we first took responsibility for that animal we committed ourselves to the gamble that life brings. I think another opportunity cost of not doing the surgery is emotional pain that comes with turning your back on what you believe is the right thing to do… when rescues are defeated they can’t help anybody and I think once they start down that slippery slope of throwing in the towel they start to compromise their beliefs which is a huge problem and hard to bounce back from. So to sum it up, no I do not think they should have spent all that money on one old horse… that was ridiculous! But would I have made the same decision? Probably. It is easy to say it was a bad decision because we were not the ones who got to know that horse, told her she was safe now, only to look her in the eye and say “whoops, you aren’t worth it… let’s go get another”.
Laura – horse, dog, cat, and rabbit owner
Giving this mare a safe, kind, peaceful death — rather than weeks of pain and the fear of the surgical situation — was NOT saying “you’re not worth it” — nor does it lead to a slippery slope of despair. I have been through a colic surgery situation, with a much younger horse who had never been mistreated, was handled, etc. It was almost a year before the horse actually felt completely well again. This mare is almost certainly going to colic again, and it will kill her eventually.
And for what? So the rescuer can feel all warm and fuzzy about saving one horse, after puting it through hell? Not even *their* horse, but a horse they took as a task of stewardship to hopefully find a forever home with someone who might consider her a pet?
Once again, if it’s DONATED money, it’s not YOUR money. If you choose to overspend your OWN money on your OWN animal, that’s fine, and yes, it’s your decision. These funds were not the rescue’s to spend on a horse.
I have a pipe dream of some day having the resources to form a rescue. What I have pictured is more of a non-profit business for horses that are down on their luck. I believe what I could contribute the most to truly help the animals is time and training. I would personally be most attracted to the young, unfortunate souls that found their way down a slippery slope from the failed backyard breeders. I would evaluate the horses for potential based on conformation and hope, regardless of their breed. My course of action would be to get them healthy and then provide them with an education suitable to their type. I would like to see these horses find homes with a bright future ahead of them. Not to say I wouldn’t fall for a few seniors who could live out their days with me too.
I’m a realistic person. I know that if I choose to put $10,000 worth of surgery into one rescue, there are five healthier horses going to slaughter that could’ve eaten for a year with that money. I’m not a gambler and even 90% of a guarantee for a full recovery wouldn’t convince me to take that chance on a horse I know nothing about. If it was one of my personal animals, that’s another story. But the money spent on that mare, along with the risk of death, or future risk of scar tissue complications, puts me firmly in the ‘euth’ side of the debate. Some may consider the act of saving this mare heroic, I see it as impractical. Other horses received a death sentence for that decision.
This is what we do now, although we are not a non-profit. Every cent that is spent on horse care comes out of my pocket. I have to admit that I tend to go for the younger and perhaps more marketable horses. If I’m unable to rehome them when they are ready, that is taking up a spot for another horse that needs to be rescued. Most of the horses I pick up sight unseen. Some come from hoarder, some from the auction, some from other rescues and others are on craigslist. It is very rewarding work, although difficult at times. If I’m lucky I can pay for a year’s worth of hay with the rehoming fees we take in. Last year, unfortunately, was a loss since the horses we took in were very sick and are just now to the point where they can be rehomed.
I would never spend $10K on a surgery for a horse. It just doesn’t make any business or moral sense at all. Even for a my heart horse (who is much younger than 19) I would never put through colic surgery. A horse is an animal that is going to die before its owner in most cases. People who are in rescue need to have the ability to let go and say goodbye when the time comes.
Common sense has gone out the window.
This is one of my pet peeves with rescues. Some are bleeding hearts and DON’T KNOW WHEN TO SAY WHEN!
Joe at TB FRIENDS has figured it out. He will rescue a horse KNOWING that he is bringing it home to euthanize. He finds peace in knowing that he gave the horse the greatest gift of all, a dignified exit.
I agree about Joe at TBFriends. He writes very kindly about the horses his vet Lisa sends over the Bridge, and while he doesn’t say this, those of us reading know that for at least a day the horse had a positive experience with people and a dignified dispatch on its next journey.
One of the unfortunate upsides about there being so damn many horses in need of saving (just as we see in the dog world) is that there is a pretty broad legitimate principled midrange here, and as far as I’m concerned if the animals in the rescue’s care are safe and well cared for, and there’s no actual financial malfeasance going on and all is transparent, it’s cool for each rescue to make its own choices, and it’s up to adopters and donors to decide with their eyes open which model and vibe they’re most comfortable supporting.
As for me, I would be much, much more comfortable supporting a rescue willing to do whatever it took for any animal it took in who had decent potential for quality of life, over playing numbers games over hypothetical turnover it might be able to achieve with the dollars. So if I were a potential donor, I would tend to see the saga of the Standardbred as a sign that this rescue was serious about its commitment, and one worthy of my bux.
I worked for the SPCA for years…and as the person who actually performed the euthanasias, it was often my decision who got to live, and who had run out of time. It’s NOT an easy decision…but you do it because you CAN’T save them all and by choosing to humanely end the life of THIS one…you can save FIVE others. For the cost of $10,000….how much hay could they have bought? How many other horse’s lives could have been saved?
I think they made a bad choice.
In my mind…they SHOULD have said “19? Colic? 60%? Sorry sweetie. We love you, but this just isn’t meant to be. Here’s some mash with a ton of molassas.” and let her enjoy her last meal and then held her head and told her what a good girl she was and that she was loved, while letting her slip away.
Is it easy? Nope. Is it the right decision? I think so.
It’s easy to be selfish and get dragged into the mentality that you CAN save them all…but that’s a quick way to either end up as a hoarder, end up with horses that you can’t afford to feed and aren’t adoptable/wanted, or burn out and shut down REALLY fast.
I agree…a good rescue needs to run like a business. It isn’t always politically correct this way, but it gets more done and saves more lives in the long run.
I live in the same city as this rescue and have been following the many newspaper articles about this 19 year old mare.
Personally if she were my mare I would have thought long and hard before spending 12k on her surgery. But in the same note I recently spent 15k in vet bills for my sick horse and dog. BUT this was my choice and I will be paying down these bills for years to come, and I certainly won’t be asking anyone to foot my bills.
As a rescue I was stunned that they would spend 12k on a horse with only a 60% chance of survival and then go after the public for donations.This poor mare deserved humane euthanasia in my opinion. The horses that could have been saved from slaughter and rehomed with 12k is worth more than saving this one mare and now trying to find her a home. This is perhaps the reason this rescue isnt a registered charity as they would have had a board make this decision and not themselves. They would have been held accountable. If they wanted to have this surgery then they should be prepared to pay it like the rest of us would have to if we made the same decision.
I know certainly the SPCA would not have made this same decision, she would have been humanely euthanised period.
Clearly how can anyone run any organization without funds. Personally I think that a new type of rescue needs to be created. One that joins forces with a gun club and a zoo or sanctuary. Many horses need to be euth’d but why do we have to fill bodies full of toxic waste. It really is bad for the environment and a waste. I know it’s hard to euth a perfectly good horse but I think it is better than sending them to auction. Although I am against the slaughter of horses maybe we could solve two problems with mobile slaughter. The facts are there are too many horses, too many dogs, and too many cats. Shelters are full, good homes are full and breeders just won’t stop. In the end I think we really need a legislated solution to the domesticated animal overpopulation problem ’cause I don’t see it stopping anytime soon especially with the likes of AQHA saying breed more please.
Another note regarding the mare who received the surgery. I would like to know why the vet would have advised them to perform the surgery. It was very wrong of her/him to advise anything other than euthanasia considering the economic times and the lack of suitable homes. I’m pretty disappointed with the attending vet. Please tell me why the vet association is a pro-slaughter organization… can you say conflict of interest.
To be fair, we don’t know what the vet said. A vet can only euthanize a horse if the owner agrees — if the owner is standing there saying, DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE, no I won’t sign a release for euthanasia, the vet is pretty much stuck. S/he could refuse to do the surgery, I suppose, but that wouldn’t help — they’d find someone to do it, probably for full price.
So we don’t know if the vet advised or even suggested surgery. For all we know, the conversation went along the lines of, “I recommend euthanasia.”
“NO NONO isn’t there anything you can do?”
” Well, we could try surgery, but I wouldn’t give her better than a 60% chance and I’d have to charge you $12K. She might not even survive anesthesia.”
“Do it.”
“Are you sure? i cannot recommend it.”
“Do it.”
and so on.
What you say may be true – of course. However, I do find it really hard to believe that a rescue with years of experience etc would say that if the vet said “that all things considered I recommend euthanasia”. Also from personal experience there are plenty of greedy vets that advise all sorts of shit that will cost dearly. Some vets are supremely good at making people feel like shit if they don’t do the expensive surgery. Come on pretty much everyone I know that has animals has experienced this.
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN.
BOY, do I hate that. You’re already suffering along with your animal, and then here’s Mr/Ms Veterinarian with dollar signs in their eyes. I thank the Lord that I have finally found vets (one for my dog, one for my guinea pigs) who give me HONEST and unbiased advice, not based on fattening their wallets. When my dog blew out her knee three years ago both surgical options were fairly presented, i.e. traditional and TPLO surgery. I chose traditional surgery, which was half the price, and was NEVER made to feel bad about picking the lower-cost option. And by the way, the dog is doing fantastic.
When my piggie was sick that vet said, “Well, you could take him for an MRI, and I could try surgery. But I feel strongly this is not “fixable.” (Pig had obstructions in both ureters, found on x-ray) Guy could have soaked me for at least another $600, but no, he helped me decide to go ahead and euth my little baby. He immediately did a necropsy and when i saw the size of the stones poor pig had been harboring, I knew he’d been exactly right: not fixable (the ureters were blown and we’re talking about teeny-tiny structures in a guinea pig). I trust both of these vets completely and that is a VERY nice feeling!
Then there’s the human doctors… don’t even get me started on the a-hole who wanted to put a fourth set of ear tubes in my son, PURELY to line his pockets. I gathered up my child, said “screw traditional medicine,” took him to a chiropractor and six months later kid had better hearing than ever. Also been fine ever since, 10 years down the road.
Doctors may hate me and think I ask too many questions, but I’ll be damned if I’m paying for unnecessary medical procedures, be they for animal or human!
Is different to spend 10k on your -own animal- and one you have hopes for adopting. Like others have said, it would not have been “hard-hearted” or irresponsible to put this horse down, and allocate those funds to other animals. But it seems irresponsible to spend the feed budget of your rescue to save a single animal.
You can’t save them all when your pockets aren’t bottomless. I don’t begrudge anyone, rescue or not, who has to make that end-of-life decision, but I think emotions get in the way, and animals end up suffering needlessly (though not intentionally).
No question. The horse should have put down.
I think there is mostly ego involved here. It’s a big deal in the rescue world to say “look at this horse! She was in such bad condition she was only given x% chance to live! Everyone else gave up, but WE SAVED HER!” They post on Facebook and on blogs, they beg for money for vet bills. They talk about her “Spirit, soulful eyes, will to live, etc. etc.”
But in reality they have an animal in pain, who will continue to be in pain as they try to ‘save’ them. Horses don’t yelp or cry, but they feel pain all the same. Colic surgery is painful, the recovery is painful, and recurrence is common. So they will drag the poor horse through all this pain and suffering, then will most likely end up having to put her down anyway.
Or, they can give her some carrots and pain meds, and put her down with love and kindness before she goes through all that.
But that doesn’t play as well on Facebook.
Maybe someone should contact the rescue them self and get the facts. Sure that 10k could have saved X number of horses but who knows what the extenuating factors are? Maybe they only have a small property, maybe they’re at capacity and therefore can’t at this moment save those hypothetical horses. Would it not then make sense to spend they allocated vet funds on the horses currently in their care rather than the hypothetical horses that MIGHT be in their care in the future?
Wouldn’t it be great if all our rescues had the resources to pay for even their most extreme vet bills if the horse has a positive prognosis for good quality of life? It’s sad this is not the norm. It would be FANTASTIC if all the rescues were well funded! Why are we so quick to judge this rescue?
This rescue never claimed they were “out of money”. Sure they’re using the horse as a “poster horse” for getting donations into the rescue but it’s not like they’re going around knocking on every door demanding you give your $20 to help pay the mare’s vet bill. They made the decision, they have to pay the money. If the media attention gets them a few more dollars good on them because you know what, these people truly do a good job.
It was mentioned that one article says the rescue stated they only have 2 months worth of hay left. Did it say they can’t afford to buy more? No. These people are not starving horses because they don’t have enough feed. Maybe they live in a place where in 2 months the climate is warm enough to have the pastures in and therefore hay is not such a concern, or maybe they only keep a few months worth of hay in stock at one time…. who knows, why don’t we ask?
Limited facts were published here but judgment abounds!
Actually the article did say they couldn’t afford to buy more – the rest of the quote said they didn’t know what they were going to do after that two months. This post was not meant to attack this rescue, which is why I didn’t publish their name or link to any of the articles I found. They are not the only rescue to spend an exorbitant amount on one lucky horse – merely the most recent. The point of this post wasn’t to pick on them, more to highlight a precarious situation and encourage discussion.
I would bet that not only do they not have money to pay for more food, but that they also still have a 10-12k vet bill. I highly doubt any of the missing food money went to the vet. They probably have a running vet bill and it suddenly jumped up accordingly. I don’t know how other vets work with rescues but mine definitely lets the local rescue keep a rather large running tab and they pay what they can when they can.
That said, the 19 year old mare probably should have been euthanized. However, if you’ve never been through a colic that ended up needing surgery, I will assure you that not everything is cut and dried especially when calculating the survival factor before you start. Many times it’s can be simple as undoing a twist because of a loop of gut that headed the wrong direction due to too much gas. For the horse releasing the gas is INSTANT relief, not fear or a ton of pain as some people think, you can even tell this when they are knocked out and on their backs on a table. Sometimes the surgery becomes much more involved as in there is a real defect or severe impaction or worse: hind gut ulcers near perforating or gut death due to a sudden lack of blood supply for various reasons. Depending on how widespread you may or may not be able to resolve with a resection. HInd guts respond well to resections, small intestines are much more difficult. Even the vet really has no idea until they make the cut and get in there (with the exception of gut death, a belly tap can tell you if you are already too late) Hence the 60% chance of survival. It could be something simple or something drastic. It could be a 3K bill or a lot more serious like this mare. (even 3K is a lot for a rescue horse). The fact is every case is different and you don’t know until you get in there.
FWIW, I have never had to make the decision for one of MY horses, however I’ve had the unpleasure of personally carting three of our boarders horses and my sister’s horse into the clinic and surgery in the middle of the night (after “regular” colic care earlier in the evening) One of these horses was euthanized on the table with worm damage (a previously rescued horse) and three survived. Of the three that survived, two colicked severely again within two years and one of those was euthanized on the table worm damage (and also a rescued horse), the other didn’t go surgical by the owners decision and died in her stall at the vets on an painkiller/hydration IV. My sister’s horse is alive and mostly well, but knowing what we know now about him (he had hindgut ulcers and probably still does despite aggressive treatment) the decision might have been different, he won’t be getting a recap if it happens again. If you would like to see what colic surgery (and others) look like go here: http://cristyc.smugmug.com/Stock-Photography/Veterinary (warning, not for the easily queasy, there is blood & guts).
BTW, the horse that died in the stall was necropsied and did have worm damage also. She wasn’t a rescue.
This is probably exactly why at least three of the boarders at the barn where I ride have given very explicit instructions, in black and white:
“In case of injury, colic or unforeseen veterinary emergencies, all reasonable measures excepting colic surgery by (vet name) are authorized as long as there is a good chance that they will restore the horse to riding use. If the horse is not in pain, they are to be stabilized until the owner can be contacted to make a decision. Colic surgery is not authorized. In case of severe colic and pain, horse is to be euthanized.”
I think that sums up the feeling of most of the folks at our barn, and it sure helps the barn owner.
Actually, the rescue has fully paid for Adele’s care using savings from the rescues’ owner, there is no outstanding bill. Any extra donations goes further to Adele and they still have enough money to not only buy food, but to rescue more horses, as they’ve picked up at least three since Adele’s surgery. The food bill gets paid by adoption fees, which they’ve had a few adoptions as well since Adele’s surgery so they aren’t short on cash. They aren’t going door to door asking people to donate because they have no more money, they have it posted that if you WANT to donate to the rescue you can, just as any rescue does.
Paying for Adele’s surgery has done nothing to hinder the well-being of the other rescue horses, despite what this article may make it seem. The horses are still well cared for, getting their daily grain, and still getting pulled from auctions for a chance at a better life.
Just to clarify where I got the info:
From the article:
“But without donations, the group won’t be able to take on new rescue horses.
“We’ve got enough [feed] to get through the next two months, but after that, I don’t know what we’ll do,” says Lizee.”
That’s awesome that they could do that. I bet my vet would LOVE that rescue! Thanks for the info.
There are a lot of things needing to be addressed in the whole rescue thing. But one that concerns me right now and one that I e-mailed the bloggers about is this: what IF the “rescue” is pro-slaughter? The group I have in mind is located in Oregon, appears to be pro-slaughter, and recently was active in the seizure of a herd from a rather notorious hoarder/backyard breeder in the SW Washington/Oregon border area. News reports indicate that the authorities including the attending veterinarian admitted the horses physically were not in that bad of shape although certainly their living situation was dire. The owner has been arrested and charged according to news media reports. The situation at that property has been going on for at least a decade. BUT and this is a big BUT in my thinking – the “arranging” rescue is a rescue that appears to be pro-slaughter. Not the temporary sanctuary where the horses are currently housed. I am talking about the rescue group that arranged the whole thing. I am asking if this is indeed a faux rescue – faux because it holds itself out as one thing but perhaps in reality is quite another.
Whether anyone here is pro- or anti- makes no difference if everyone agrees that “slaughter is NOT humane euthanasia.” Slaughter is not a quick well-placed bullet nor is it the blessed two-needle series by a competent and caring veterinarian. Slaughter is also not the rainbows and butterflies scenario that the AVMA official policy statement on their website would have you read and believe – there is vast evidence to conclusively prove otherwise.
So – what if the “rescue” is taking over these horses is in fact simply going to have them sold for pounds-on-the-hoof to the kill buyers? Would it be more ethical if the “rescue” admitted that its agenda includes slaughter?
Just askin’.
Hard questions, all.
We call that the Doubble Whammie, food for thought, they have to hold the horses for 6 mos after they get them from the BLM, so to prove they are not tainted and are well enough. Sobthe pick them up for a song ,stick yhem in some crud paddock for 6 months , claiming to be a rescue ,meanwhile suckers ,like me ar going poor horsey ,send them money ,and then they sell them for meat anyway. No wait ,that would have to be called the “triple whammy” .
I’m a long time follower of this blog and a first time poster. The rescue subject prompted me to post.
I work for a horse rescue in the South East and I would have put the mare down. The first lesson in the “rescue business” should be that we CANNOT save them all. It is sad and unfortunate but if we don’t heed that lesson, we will put ourselves out of business and we won’t be able to save any of them.
The rescue that I work for receives 97% of it’s horses from animal control. We have a program that supports low cost gelding. We have a program that helps responsible owners that have fallen on hard times with feed and hay for a couple of months. We have a program that helps with the cost of euthansia for those that can’t afford it. We conduct classes for local animal control departments free of charge to teach officers how to deal with equine cases. We also evaluate everything that comes through our doors. They are checked by our vet and farrier. They are vaccinated, blood is drawn, feet are trimmed. We put them on a re-feeding program. After they are healthy enough, their training needs are evaluated. We find out as much as we can about each horse and we offer them for adoption for $200-400 to screened and approved homes. We follow up post adoption and we will take them back if unforeseen problems arise. But we will not spend $10k on one horse.
We adopted out 60 horses last year. $10k is half of our feed/hay bill for the year.
It sounds like you work for a rescue that’s practical and committed. There’s a lot more to rescue than getting the horses out of their situation. It’s also about educating the horses, their owners and handlers. Can you imagine giving up half of your feed bill for one horse? It’s not exactly like this horse was famous and gratuities are going to sail in on pigeons.
Thank you blondemare. We try hard to be reasonable. We have a good donor base that has supported us for almost 12 years. Saving one horse can’t be our only mission. We need to improve legislation, law enforcement and educate owners. Those things will have a long term effect on equine welfare in our state.
Brilliant, the world needs more people like you and more sensibly run rescues- for all animals.
The riding school I grew up in had a two tier policy – horses that were particularly meaningful to the owners/extremely useful in the school would get preferential treatment if the recovery prognosis was good, horses that weren’t were a) given a chance to recover in a big field or b) put down quickly. (and that means either euthanasia or local slaughter – as in, you’d drive the horse to the knacker and they’d be put down with a bolt gun there and then – no holding pens, no transport other than a few miles.) And the second was painful to know – but in the end, there wasn’t much difference for the horse, and a thousand dollars in feed and care and give them longer rest periods for the _other_ horses made a hell of a difference to _them_.
And the last is the important thing how much vetinary care and specialist farrier attention and fencing repairs would $10K buy, and how much difference does that make to the other horses? Invest your private money in your private horse; but once you have others to think about – or other family members to think about – you need to make a sensible decision. That mare wasn’t a great surgery candidate – by all means, cry cocodile tears, but she was, however nice she was, only one of hundreds of horses; they didn’t have her long enough to count her as a family member, as we tend to do with horses we’ve kept for years. You *can’t* save them all, and you know that you’ll buy horses that might not make it. Still sucks, but you need to put the other horses first.
I agree, but what bothers me even more is heroic attempts to save aggressive animals. With medical conditions we can estimate the costs and recovery time pretty well. But with temperament issues, we never know when or if something will work, and in the meantime the animal is costing money and endangering people. Too often trainers try to save aggressive animals just to show how great their training skills are. For the time it takes to rehab one aggressive animal, we may be able to save two friendly ones.
I knew someone that sent their horse for colic surgery not once, but TWICE at the age of 29! Are you kidding me? It was private individual, but really? I own a 30 year old horse and as much as I love him, he was first horse, and he was delivered on the day my dad passed away, I would have him put down if he had to have an operation of any type. It just doesn’t make sense to spend that kind of money.
I have often played the “what if” scenario if I were to start a rescue. Not only would I not spend money on horses that would take expensive and extended vet care, I would only take horses that had a good chance of finding a home. I’ve checked websited for rescues and many have an overabundance of pasture pets, but no sound riding prospects. Horses are way too expensive a “luxury” to be pasture ornaments. For that matter, our dogs even have jobs. My Aussie is the trail dog and my husband’s English Setter is the bird dog. Guess I’m just practical that way.
One of my Arab mares (actually, as she was both the first and the last she was the Arab mare) had colic surgery. I had her out on loan and, by the time they phoned me to tell me she was colicking they had already arranged for her to go into the Royal Veterinary Hospital, which is local to me. If she had not been insured I would have vetoed it, even though she was already on the lorry and heading in. She was given a good chance of survival, but a poor chance of recovery- something like 40-60%) but the loaner was hysterical by now, and it was not my money, so I let her go ahead. After the surgery she made a good initial recovery, but my friend who was head of obstetrics at the time, showed me, on a diagram, exactly what was going on inside. They had taken fifteen foot of gut, the absolute limit, out, and there were still necrotic patches through the gut. The thing that would kill her, my friend explained, was the lesions that would form inside and adhere to the gut, in effect strangulating it. The operating surgeon, who was rated at the time as the best in the world, said there was no chance of operating again, if she colicked again she was effectively, dead. My friend advised me to put her in foal as soon as I could. The operating surgeon told me I could do anything with her once she was fit, except breed again. I opted to take my friends advise as it made sense that lesions could not adhere to the gut if it was being constantly pushed around by a swelling womb. As he pointed out if I did nothing she was probably going to die in a few years, if I put her in foal she had a chance. She bred me two cracking foals once she was fit, and lived another ten years. I did not let her go back to the loaners, even though they were quite persistent and got rather nasty, it was their fault, directly, that she colicked. I have never let another horse go on loan. So, this mare, with the surgery, has a very low chance of actually surviving for any length of time as there is nothing that can be done, even today, to prevent lesions forming. I give her three years, tops. She may be one of the ones that beat the odds as pulls through, but it one hell of a long set of odds. IT is not surviving the operation that is the challenge, it is surviving the next couple of years. I wish more people were aware of these facts.
Every time you make a treatment decision for an animal, there are two questions that you must answer:
1) is this in the animal’s best interest?
2) can I afford it?
If the answer to either of those is “no”, you euthanize the animal. A 60% chance of recovery makes it difficult to answer “yes” to the first question, although I suppose it’s possible.
For a rescue to answer “yes” to the second when the question is worth $10,000 is irresponsible.
Most often when in a crisis situation such as colic it’s hard to make to appropriate decision. The reason is our Emotional state is on High Wind. I could go on and on about this , even at this time there are predators with degrees who seem to care about your horse , they want your money. No all but most . There should be a Q&A available to horse owners faced with this crisis so they can come to a rational logical decision about what the course of treatment should be. Based on facts : costs , prognosis , type of colic unvolved , aftercare , if surgery is your decision. The vets and hospitals just want a blank credit card.,
After our beloved horses second bout with Gas colic , we decided it was time. He told us in his way he was in so much pain, inspite of all the I.V. Drugs, tubbing ,palping. His cecum was going to explode, we moved him to a new barn,the owner thought he was skinny,she bolted him with grain and after the 10grand we spent on his 1st colic had him managed, for years with the right combo of intake,and no no ‘s ,like apples .She fed him to death and dispite our objections, well you know some of the horse people just think they know everything, and their way is the only way .
Well my daughter and I were with him when we left this world, it was a very bad day, His name was Buster we had him since he was a 2nd old green , left us a as at 20. It was as if I lost a child,my daughter had never had such a great loss in her life,it was a very hard process to not have him here anymore.
We adopted a a wonderful Quarterhorse,she rides him everyday, but That Leopard app was and will always be her first love. We loved him enough to let him go.
My friend had a race horse out of affirmed,he had colic, Spent 10 gees on surgery, surgery failed went in for 2 nd surgery, He died , 20thousand dollars and a dead horse. That vet raked her and her credit card over the coals.
No I would not have spent Rescue money on a horse whos history was vague at best, at 19 years old. I think I hope I would have had the presence of mind to have him euthanized . just saying…..
I volunteered for two years with a cat rescue, and our policy was very simply this:
When in doubt, do the greater good for the greater number of lives.
The rescue business in New Zealand is quite small compared to the issues in the USA. However there have been a couple of high profile cases in the last two years, both involving racehorses, one Standardbreds and one Thoroughbreds.
My belief was that the amount of money that was spent trying to rescue, rehabilitate and re-home some of these horses was out of proportion with the possibility of them having good quality of life, or being able to be anything other than a paddock ornament for years to come.
I was viciously criticised for saying on a public forum that that money would have been better off spent pursuing a prosecution against those responsible rather than providing an ambulance at the bottom of the cliff to clear up their mess.
So, whilst I have the greatest of respect for those that do this work and support the main organisation here financially, I agree with your sentiments. Its a shit of a job, but leading with head rather than just heart makes sense to me.
I’m so glad this was written about. I’ve never quite understood why rescues blow tons of money on horses that probably should be euthed. One local rescue close to me spent several thousand dollars on dental work for a 19 year old gelding. Then, he was adopted out for a couple of hundred dollars. Didn’t make sense, nor does it. Also, I’m not sure why the few rescues I know fairly up close and personal have retirement horses. Horses that will stand around for the rest of their lives, not being ridden or used in any way. Just standing there. People can send money to ‘adopt’ one but it has to stay at the rescue. Maybe this is standard operating procedure but it seems odd to me. I’d rather my money went to usable horses and finding them homes.
In regards to retirement horses:
Part of our local rescue’s role in the community is to take horses seized by or turned over to the city/county/state, and help out in large-scale rescues like those involving the Humane Society. When it comes to large-scale rescues we can usually ask to take youngsters or mares with foals, which ups the odds of getting something that may some day be adoptable. Most often, the horses we get from the city/county/state are elderly, and sometimes all the horses from a larger operation are older as well. Or we get a foal with an injury or birth defect that makes it less desirable.
Once a horse is on our property, we take care of that horse for its entire life. If it gets adopted, we follow up at least once a year until the end. If the adopter ever needs to be rid of the horse, it comes back to us. Period. In theory, all our horses are adoptable. In practice, no one is going to adopt a pair of 30 year old geldings who need special farrier care. When we got that pair, however, they were in their mid-teens, healthy, and husband safe on the trail. They came in with half a dozen other horses in a larger starvation and neglect case, and were too well bonded to separate. For some reason, the right home never came along for them and they’ve been with us for 14 years now.
My point is, we don’t have control over every horse we take in, and even the most adoptable horses sometimes just never find the right human(s). Because we’re committed to these animals for life, we always end up supporting a dozen or so horses in their late 20s-mid 40s who will probably never be adopted. And you know what? That’s okay. They were all badly abused, many worked hard before coming to us, and they deserve a peaceful retirement. And it’s not like they just stand around and do nothing: We use our elderly residents to teach girl- and boy scouts about horses, and two universities in the area use them a couple times a semester for hands-on anatomy or vet tech training. They also get lots of massages and reiki treatments through a local massage school, and a few of them participate in therapy sessions for veterans with PTSD.
Mangos, you make two points. Firstly, if you’re a private rescuer with two or three slots then you’ll pick the horses with the best chance of turnaround – the ones that need some TLC and training and can go on to productive lives, and I have no problems with people selling these horses either. If you’re a rescue operation and you wish to only pick the good ones that have fallen on hard times… who, exactly, is supposed to look after the ones in their teens and twenties who may never be fully rideable again, if not rescues? Many pasture ornaments, once healthy, don’t need extraordinary investments in being kept healthy – but they might not be easy (or possible) to adopt out.
And the other is that ‘not an attractive riding horse’ does not mean a horse is useless. There are some riders who are quite happy to walk the trails once or twice a week on a safe horse, there are people who want a companion that can be left alone when they take their main horse out but doesn’t need a lot of attention and exercise. And particularly when you’re teaching children or vulnerable adults, safe, placid horses are worth their weight in gold, even if they’re not ridable or need to be managed very carefully. (A lot of horses are ok with light work if the rider is careful and patient; many horses benefit from light, controlled exercise but will not stand up to ‘being worked’.)
I think it really depends.
If this is a privately funded rescue, then it’s completely up to them what they do with their money (which is why I don’t take donations, ever. I want to be completely responsible for any decisions I make without having to answer to anyone). If on the other hand, this rescue is receiving donations (which is what it sounds like), then I really have to ask if spending $10,000 on a horse who is unlikely to be highly adoptable (given her age) was worth it. I’m glad this horse was saved and I don’t condemn them for making that decision, but with that $10,000 they probably could have saved a lot more horses, which may have led more productive lives.
I can imagine how tough this situation would be. If you put the horse down, people would call you heartless, or perhaps even say that you shouldn’t take on animals that you can’t afford to care for, but let’s be honest, how many of us actually have a spare $10,000 laying around for each horse we own? I know I don’t. I have a nest egg, but it’s only around $6,000 and that is for my 3 horses and the one rescue. If a publicly funded rescue DID have a spare $10,000 laying around for each horse in their care, then people would still complain because they have so much money that isn’t being used to help the horses. If the animal was not put down, people would be unhappy that so much was spent on one animal when that money could have saved countless others. It’s a tough situation to be in and I don’t envy them. In that particular situation though, I’m reasonably sure I would have had to make a tough call and have the horse euthed.
http://www.operationhorserescue.blogspot.com
I served on the board for a rescue for a year, and have volunteered there for almost five years now. We have a very simple policy towards colic surgery, in that we don’t do it. The general consensus is that a dignified, humane death is better than the stress of going somewhere new, having major surgery, and then being confined and in pain, especially given the low odds of a full recovery (99% of the severe colics are in our seniors, 25 and older). We love all our horses, and losing a horse is never easy, but we are thankful for the time we got to love and spoil them, and also grateful that we can offer them an easy passing.
We have enough in savings to keep everyone fed and healthy for over a year, and a steady income to prevent us from dipping into savings for day-to-day expenses. All the same, if a horse needs surgery we raise funds specifically for that horse. Every horse has its fan base amongst our volunteers within a week of arriving “up front” (out of iso), and those fans are miracle workers when it comes to collecting money for “their” horse! I’d say at least 15% of the time one of those fans ends up adopting the horse, paying the majority of its surgery costs, AND doing all the follow-up care!
Published November 9, 2010
“Rescue & Horse Trader Collude to Defraud Donors & Take Advantage of Horse Owners”
THE MYTH
NorCal Equine Rescue (a.k.a. Horse Plus Humane) was intercepting a kill buyer’s double decker load of horses on route to a Mexican slaughter plant.
From NorCal’s email to donors: “This morning I got a call from the kb that has been bringing us horses. He said that if we want, that we can purchase 38-40 horses (a double decker full) straight from the slaughter pipeline. We can purchase the entire load, or none at all. It’s an all or nothing deal. We absolutely must raise $10,000 for the rescue and initial care by Monday October 11th to save these horses. I know this is huge, but I also know we can count on you and together we can make this happen. This is one slaughter pipeline load of horses that will be safe thanks to you, our supporters. If everyone does what they can, then this will happen. Even $10 helps, it all adds up.”
“I am very excited about this opportunity. In all my years of rescue, I have never heard of a slaughter truck load of horsesbeing offered for a very reasonable price like this. Let’s make history!”
If this were true, Jason & Tawnee Preisner, soon-to-be humane officers, should have reported this illegal activity (based on the laws below). Otherwise, they are effectively aiding and abetting a criminal, and rewarding him with a profit.
THE REALITY
NorCal placed an order with a low-end horse trader for a truck load of horses (so they could orchestrate a big “save” and look like heroes). The horse trader placed ads on CraigsList (see ads below) to solicit and acquire horses to meet their request, and set about gathering them up. When contacted, the horse trader openly admitted that he was taking horses to NorCal. When asked if he was the “kill buyer” they referred to in their blog/emails he said NorCal could call him whatever they wanted, whatever “worked” for them. He also stated that he had been doing this type of thing for them for awhile.
Here are the photos of his trailer at his house and on their blog
http://www.flickr.com/photos/norcals_kb
Here are his ads
Horses Wanted
Original URL: http://redding.craigslist.org/grd/1981834655.html
Date: 2010-09-30, 10:47AM
Horses wanted, Young horses, Old horses & Problem horses, Unwanted horse, We will try to rehome any horse that is either to old or wild to be rehomed. Horses unable to be re-trained or started may be sent to a local horse rescue
Call David
530-366-1385
Location: Red Bluff
Horses Wanted – $100 (Red Bluff)
Date: 2010-09-23, 11:39AM PDT
Horses Wanted!! Young horses, Old horses, Problem horses, Trained or unbroke. NO HORSE IS SENT TO SLAUGHTER!!! We train and rehome most horses. If a horse is not able to be re-homed we have a working relationship with a rescue sanctuary for all un-adoptable horses.
530-366-1385 or 209-622-8993
Location: Red Bluff
You will also see his letter of response under the name NOT A KILL BUYER
http://www.flickr.com/photos/norcals_kb/5102670997/
Not A Killer Horse Buyer (2 weeks ago)
To whom it may concern @ Horse welfare. It has come to our attention that the horse world workings of David McGrath and Sis Sweeten has come under serious scrutiny and has been published in several places. Statements have been made stating that we are not properly representing our intentions. when that is the farthest thing from the truth. The truth of the matter is that these horses are rescued from the slaughter pipe line and need good homes and some may even need to be euthanized.
“From The Horses Mouth !!!” I David McGrath have traded horses for over FORTY + years. I personally saved horses @ northern California slaughter houses long before it was illegal to kill horses in the united States. in 1973 a killer horse base price was only two cents a lb. Back then you could buy any horse for 35.00. I would buy 9 horses a week out of the slaughter houses to be re homed. I would appreciate any other communication that you feel needs to be publicized about me or my partner you contact us and get the facts right FIRST!! We will gladly and honestly answer any questions you have and then you can print the truth about us.
FACTS:
1. We do not work for any rescue.
2. We do associate with 3 California Rescues
3. We do not advocate any horse slaughter, But accept is a last resort!
4. A few horses from our adds have been sent to rescues(less than10), because of negative publicity. Horse owners/buyers are scared form the dishonest publicity we have already received.
5. Horses are sent from Washington, Oregon & California weekly to the receiving stations in New Mexico & Texas. Currently as of today….We have another 18 horses that need good homes. This group of horses started in Hermiston Oregon as 30 horses originally, was hauled to New Mexico, Rejected and returned to California on an empty truck. It doesn’t make financial sense to you, but as a man with a forty year record of good horse trading and honor among the horse community, I can get a lot done with a phone call and my word to pay the trucking bill.
6. We provide stock for California Chariadas,(Mexican Rodeo)specifically bucking horses and cattle. Mexican rodeo officials have attempted arrangements for our stock to be imported to Mexico so we have a direct connection with the Mexican export/import officials.
7. With over a year relationship with Horse Plus. The young couple are wise, fair and to be commended for there efforts
8. We Love Horses as much or more then most…We Eat, Breath, Sleep and live horses, not as a hobby but as a way of life!!
Please take the time to really consider all the information that I have given you and if you still have questions feel free to contact me directly and I would love to visit with you. I am in hopes that you might know of a few good homes for these horses.
Sincerely,
David McGrath
Sis Sweeten
530-366-1385
This man is not well respected in the horse industry , he is well known as a low end trader and supplier to Mexican rodeos- these rodeos are outlawed in California because they are known for their cruelty to animals which may explain the many injuries on horses he sold to the rescue. horse tripping
NorCal was promoting these horses as being slaughter bound, to play on donors’ emotions and quickly/easily raise $10,000.
These horses were not slaughter bound. There were no auction tags or green federal tags on these horses. They can not cross the border for slaughter without green federal tags. There is no border crossing point in CA for slaughter horses (closest ones are in TX & NM). Mexico did not “reject” these horses. They were never sitting at the border. It is utter nonsense to believe a buyer would take a load of 38-40 horses all the way to the Mexican border, and then bring ½ the load all the way back up to N.CA
These horses were not in the slaughter pipeline, they were in barns and pastures at private homes. The owners were enticed to give their horses to an “agent” for the rescue because it saved them from paying NorCal to take their horse – $150 surrender fee, $25 per hour handling fee, and $1 per mile transport costs (see their surrender policy below).
Surrender Policies -
We are an open door facility, any horse is welcome to be surrendered. The surrender fee is $150, which helps provide for their initial care. You are welcome to surrender your horse at the shelter during normal business hours, or you may contact us to make other arrangements.
We will be glad to arrange transportation of your horse to the shelter. The nominal transporting fee to help cover the fuel expenses is $1.00 a mile, round trip from our shelter. If your horse is not easily loaded (ie, in a large open pasture, not trained to load, etc) there is a $25 per hour loading fee beyond the first hour. Please contact us to arrange transportation.
NorCal has approximately a 60-70% euthanasia rate. Based on that statistic, many of these “saved” horses will likely be euthanized. Since when do we kill animals to save them? Based on CA Civil Code, we don’t (see below).
California Civil Code
1834.4. (a) It is the policy of the state that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home.
Adoptable animals include only those animals eight weeks of age or older that, at or subsequent to the time the animal is impounded or
otherwise taken into possession, have manifested no sign of a behavioral or temperamental defect that could pose a health or safety
risk or otherwise make the animal unsuitable for placement as a pet, and have manifested no sign of disease, injury, orcongenital or
hereditary condition that adversely affects the health of the animal or that is likely to adversely affect the animal ‘ s health in the future.
(b) It is the policy of the state that no treatable animal should be euthanized. A treatable animal shall include any animal that is
not adoptable but that could become adoptable with reasonable efforts. This subdivision, by itself, shall not be the basis of
liability for damages regarCalifornia euthanasia laws.
Business and Profession Code, Section 4827(d), and in the California Code of Regulations, Section 2039.
If the majority of the horses are euthanized, very little of the funds raised for their “care” will actually be needed. So NorCal adds quite a bit of fraudulently gained funds to their coffers.
They also probably used very little of the funds raised for purchasing the horses… Previously, NorCal paid this horse trader $100/horse (per their blog), but he stated that there is no “set fee”. He only asks for a donation to cover his fuel and other costs. After all, he is getting many of them for free, from owners who believe they will be rehomed or taken to a rescue to be adopted out or kept in sanctuary. He could conceivably be making 100% pure profit. And how much is NorCal making on the transaction? The 19 equines they actually ended up with likely cost them $2,000 or less.
NorCal showed no more compassion for these horses than the buyer. They had supposedly been on the road for hours, or possibly even days, yet NorCal loaded these tired, weak horses onto their trailers without so much as a drink of water or bite to eat. They also loaded a critically injured horse on the trailer, when he should have had immediate vet attention. It was cruel and abusive to jam him into a trailer with others, when he clearly could not stand, and obviously had a serious injury (broken leg).
So, what makes this arrangement any different than a typical slaughter plant purchase? A load of horses was “contracted” for. The buyer & seller both make $ and the horses end up dead.
This entire scheme is a fraud, designed to rip off donors and fill their coffers. Additionally, it will garner NorCal’s attention-hungry founder some coveted media attention and public adoration. It was probably a twisted PR event to launch their new name – Horse Plus Humane.
Healthy adoptable horses have been put down to make room for sad horses who will cause emotional upset and get donations. Horses that are healthy have been put down at alarming numbers over 30 a month in some months.
California law allows Humane Officers to put down animals without a vet explaining why the change to Horse Plus Humane Society and classes on euthanasia. It isn’t about catching bad guys. They are the bad guys.
When they got caught in their little scheme they left the killbuyer with the rest of their order causing him to place this post asking $125 for each horse. Mr Well Respected Horseperson couldn’t see how badly the horses needed vet care or even bother to wash a wound or feed them. He copied NorCal/Horse Plus’ tactics and posted sad pictures without care and asking for money.
These horses should have never been hauled let alone kept for days while he tried to get money and shame on the rescue for leavign them in his care because they were too chicken to finish their unethical deal.
Sad and tragic these horses suffered far longer than needed because of money
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55189426@N02/
Enough it is time to stop them from becoming Officers and close this fake rescue down.
They were told by The real California Humane to remove from the website that used to state “we are Humane Officers”
You should write this up as an article for this blog – it seems to me that commentary on news in the horse world is sorely missing from this blog. Opinions on bad rescues in the media, what about the NYC carriage horses, what about that creepy women who shot her own horse cut it open and crawled in… there’s so much material to comment on and it would be great to see that here again.
Definitely send us a guest post! We need more!
Some of the older news items we’ve already covered on our own blog and were trying not to recycle material (http://snarkyrider.com/2011/11/03/someone-watched-star-wars-too-much/ – for the creepy woman).
I realize this isn’t quite on point with rescues, but I can’t believe this topic is coming up without anyone mentioning insurance. I want medical decisions to be made for medical reasons, not financial ones. Because I can’t put a price in dollars on how much I value my animals. A little over a year ago I had to put down a much-loved horse after a pasture accident. The vet told me euthanisia was really the only option, even if she was rushed into surgery it was unlikely she could be saved. Being in that moment made me think about how difficult it would have been if my horse could have been saved, but only by an expensive emergency surgery. It is easy to say what you think you would do when it’s all hypothetical but the emotions in the moment of facing my horse’s sudden, unexpected death were so intense. I know I had previously thought that since this was not an expensive horse, I would not pay for surgery for her, but in that horrible moment I would have said yes to pretty much any number if it was likely to save my horse.
After going through that, when I bought another horse, I did my research and picked out an insurance plan with medical/surgical coverage. I hope I never, ever need to use it, but because it is there, if my new horse has a serious colic, the decision will be based on the medical outcomes only.
I realize that rescues can’t really be expected to put insurance on each and every rescue horse, but for the various people who have said they didn’t think they could pay for a life-saving surgery on their own private horses, it is something to consider.
Just be sure to really closely read the entire policy including the fine print. Animal medical and mortality policies are not required by law to be “readable” like homeowners or human-health policies are and the animal policies are chock full of tricks and traps for the unwary. You should first determine if your policy is a “reimbursement” policy (meaning you would have to go ahead and pony up the five figure fees for the surgery paying the vet, and then apply to the insurance company for reimbursement which may not actually be the amount charged by the vet; you should also determine right away whether permission is required from the insurance company before your horse goes into surgery – do NOT assume that what is being done is “covered” — and some insurers want to know first, they want to know about it from the veterinarians, and sometimes the requirements they put on the veterinarians is very complicated and time-sensitive. In those cases, if all the insurer’s conditions are not met you will still owe the entire bill.
Repeat after me: insurance companies are NOT YOUR FRIENDS. They are in business to make money and keep all the money they can. That is why for every single policy sold by a well-meaning agent and bought by a well-meaning horse owner there needs to be a complete buyer-beware scenario before money changes hands.
For those who do not have insurance or adequate financial resources and are in a tight time situation, there are some foundations offering grants out there and you should do your research long before the need actually arises.
As a person who used to live in the same town, and has donated money to this rescue in the past, I have to say that I don’t know how I feel about this. In general they do very good work for the horses. Their adoption prices never cover the costs that go into each horse (300 to 500 dollars is the norm), they do ensure they are rideable and keep them under saddle until they are adopted if this is possible, and they have recently euthanized 3 horses that I know of. They do have a small hay-storage area, which means they can’t store much more than two months worth of hay, and I am not sure about the article stating they didn’t have money for hay after 2 months… It doesn’t really sound right.
These people are NOT anti-euthanasia, and while I don’t necessarily agree with their choice to keep this mare going, they obviously had some reason, and I sort of doubt that it was for the attention. They had already been in the news and the papers very recently for reuniting a woman with her horse who was about to go to slaughter. The rescue had ALREADY received a huge amount of attention, so they wouldn’t need more at that time. I feel like it was a slightly unfortunate emotional decision, which resulted in a huge bill…
My understanding is that they do take donations, but the majority of the bills are paid by the rescue operator. Their property is not large, and they are limited in the number of horses they can take. I have never heard (until this situation) that they have mismanaged funds, been deceitful, or done anything underhanded. They have a few rideable horses that I believe have been in their care since last spring, with no health issues, and they don’t dump them at the auction again.
I understand that people are offended that they spent so much on one single horse, but really it is out of our hands. There are rescues that do much, much worse if you wanted to talk about mismanaged funds, etc… Also, the financial situation in BC and the Lower Mainland isn’t really as dour as some have tried to make it out to be.
I guess I am just saying that one questionable decision does not mean this is a bad rescue. I’ve been very happy in general to know there is at least ONE reputable rescue in the lower mainland. Even if perhaps their hearts have been a little bigger than their pockets this time.
I can quote 3 or occasions, in the short time I have followed this rescue, of clouded judgement. Not regarding funding, but of ethics and business practices. One such was an arab mare that the owners wanted to euthanize…and the rescue stepped in and “convinced” them to surrender her to the rescue. The mare was aged (28) and had Cushings. The family felt it best to euthanize rather than rehome. She has since died, I believe from her complications of the disease. So they removed her from a long standing home, into a rescue, then into foster where she succumbs to the same disease that motivated the original owners to euthanize. Best interest of the horse? Not really in my opinion.
They got several TB’s in that originated from the same farm. They openly flamed the original farm owner…but all 3 had been homed or given into rescues when the farm disbanded. But the original farm owner was publicly named, and slandered without any contact from said rescue, and upon threat of legal action, her name was removed. 2 of these horses (both 2 yo TB’s, one a stud colt) along with a 3rd non tb mare, were adopted out to a 15 year old girl with no income and little horse experience. Best interest of the horses? I don’t think so.
This rescue openly and publicly attacked a notable Canadian Equine College for dumping several horses in the local auction with no proof. Claims made were said college shipped these horses over 1,000 kms (12 plus hours) to dispose of them after henious abuse. After the legal counsel was sought, said rescue issued a public apology on their Facebook page. Turns out said horses HAD at one point in time, been located at the college, but had long since been removed by the owners, the college owns very few of their own animals, and certainly would not pay to ship them over 1000kms to dispose of them, especially since they run an AHT program and their equine program is headed by a veterinarian.
I also was shocked to see $12,000 put into surgery of a 19 yo mare, who will undoubtedly colic again. My opinion, a shoot first ask questions later type of place, and while they may do great work sometimes, the brief track record I have witnessed has secured that I personally would NEVER support nor buy from this rescue.
“The general consensus is that a dignified, humane death is better than the stress of going somewhere new, having major surgery, and then being confined and in pain, especially given the low odds of a full recovery”
Mangos said this up above. This is the key to treating animals. So many of us forget that animals don’t speak English. No one says to an animal, “Okay buddy, we are going to put you through Chemo and Radiation, and we are going to beat this thing!” Or “Don’t worry, I know this hurts but in the end you will feel better.”
Animals don’t understand. When you treat an animal, when you decide to do surgery or something else, you have to remember that this animal doesn’t understand. You are going to hurt it, make it uncomfortable, and it is never going to understand why. Treatment for severe illness or injury is a human construct, and we do it for ourselves. So unless that horse (or whatever animal) is going to have a full recovery and be a healthy ball of energy when it’s all done, skip the treatment– you are only torturing an animal that doesn’t know why you are torturing it.
FYI- passing along this info from…
http://www.horsechannel.com/horse-news/2012/02/28/arabian-horse-rescue.aspx
February 28, 2012
Dozens of Arabian horses will be available for adoption this week in Pennsylvania
The horses were rescued after several years with minimal care and no handling.
The Arabian Rescue Mission of New Jersey has taken on the task of finding adoptive homes for a herd of nearly 50 horses that had been left to fend for themselves on a farm in West Virginia. The horses were transported from the farm to the Westmoreland Fairgrounds in Pennsylvania last weekend and are being assessed for adoptability.
According to reports, the horses had been left by their owner, Dr. Fazal Kahn, when he moved to India in 2008. The horses had hundreds of acres to roam, and a volunteer caretaker occasionally brought hay. Dr. Kahn passed away in December of 2011, and the Arabian Rescue Mission stepped in when his family members sought help finding new homes for the horses.
Although some of the horses were found deceased, the remaining horses are said to be in moderate physical condition, with most of them approximately 100 pounds underweight. All of them are reported to have rain rot and are in need of proper hoof care. Some may have heavy parasite loads.
The horses are said to have good temperaments, but most have little to no training and will require experienced handlers. Potential adopters will be required to provide references from a veterinarian, a farrier and a third character reference who is not related to the adopter.
For more information, contact the Arabian Rescue Mission
Just FYI – something ain’t right about the stories reported on this. There are definitely details missing (http://snarkyrider.com/2012/02/27/have-you-provided-for-you-horse-in-your-will/)
Well, as a child coming from an abused home one ride on that loving mare would be priceless. Horses saved me in my childhood. I would have killed myself if it wasn’t for a geldings someone gave to my mom. He was 25 and had been abused all his life. I loved him more than anything. On those days when I would be beaten he would be my shield and my demons were crushed under his hooves. He was my best friend and he never said one word. He kept my going though my teen years and I would be dead without him. He lived to be 31 out of pure love and compassion I had for him. Everyday because at 3:35 I would hop of the bus and jump onto his back and ride my fear away. J&M Horse Rescue they save horses who save children like me. This story hits home to me and I know once again one little girl will ride upon Adele’s back. She will know the love of a horse and the shelter and strength they provide for people. So FUCK all the haters.
Really ? That last sentance says you learned nothing from that horse. What a tragedy.
I feel your pain but you are anthropomorphising in the worst way. The mare has NO idea what is going on. She was in pain and now she is in more pain. I have been through this with my Arab mare and believe me, it is really heart rending to watch and made me doubt, more than once, if I should ever have allowed it. This was not an old mare, either, it was mare that had been sound and fit and sassy, she recovered, it took months, but she did recover. Thanks to a vet friends good advice she actually survived, but this mare will not. Her riding days are long gone and my bet is that she will be dead of complications within three years.
There is no call and no need for your aggression and anger, even if you have had a hard life. You cannot save them all and sometimes a dignified death is the best option.
You degrade yourself and all people in your position by your crass comments and your aggressive reactions.
I’ve been sitting here reading all the comments… I suppose I’ll add my story to the mix.
I had to make this decision several years ago (in 2007) for a horse who I’d grown up with since he and I were both 4 years old. Dustin had been my mother’s horse till she died of breast cancer when I was 13 and then he was mine until just past his 22nd birthday when he colic’ed. He’d been the only stable thing in my life as my family moved over seas and back a couple times, always back to him. He’d always nicker even after a year away from me when he heard my voice. He even went with me to Maryland an endured a significant climate and lifestyle change when I was a working student there.
It happened when he was being shipped to Kentucky from California. He never shipped that great but he was never a colic’er. He was not even out of the state, but was too far away for me to be there. I had $10,000 saved up for my move to Kentucky where I was to start a new life and maybe school. My family were with me when we got the call that they thought it was a twist and it would be $10,000 to do the surgery. It was the hardest thing I ever had to do to tell them to do what they could without surgery for a horse that was by childhood best friend and only link to my mother.
But if we had done it… all my college savings money would have been gone, at 22 there was no telling if he’d pull through it, and the amount we’d have to pay in his recovery care would likely have been too much for my family with the loss of our major source of income not too long prior. It sucked. It took me 3 years to finally be completely okay with what I did, but when I got that call I knew exactly the pain he was going through (I suffer from extreme abdominal discomfort due to stress issues and not too long before his passing had been hospitalized for it briefly) and I knew he wouldn’t understand it.
So if a girl with more emotional ties to that horse than you could shake a stick at could make that decision not to put the quality of his and her family’s life at risk? I think a rescue should be able to make that call when it sacrifices the lives of so many other horses.
I have had first hand experience with the rescue. I belive what they did was something to be proud of, not something to be questioned. They saved a horse’s life. Put the age and condition aside,this horse deserved it just as much as any other. When it comes to how much money they spent on one horse, I dont think that is a problem. They are still feeding, and caring for the horses they currently have and are rescuing as many horses as they would have if they hadnt spent the large amount of money on the surgery. This rescue had the mares best intrest at heart, she has many many more years to live a happy life, something this horse wouldnt have been able to have if it wasnt for the rescue spending the time, money, and effort to save her. As much money as it was, I would have done the same exact thing for anyone of my four horses and many others I know would have too, so Why should it be any different for a rescued 19 year old horse? It shouldnt be! As for “Caring to much” I dont think that is possible, they are helping dozens of horses find new and loving homes, being saved from a horrid death at the slaughter houses…they care because these are animals that they have given a second chance. I think if any other rescue had the money and time to do what this mentioned rescue did, and didnt care enough to save this horse, they are in the wrong “bussiness” Of corse you have to know when its time to put an animal to sleep/time to give up, but this horse that they saved is probably sitting in her stall happily munching away on her hay, and people are questioning if they should have saved her. She had the will to live, and they had to will to help her. Why is there even any thought to what they did? Its amazing.
See, this is half the problem- you quite obviously know nothing at all about what was involved. If she si “sitting in her stall munching hay” she will be dead- she will not be allowed hay for days yet!
You just are not thinking straight- what about all the other horses, who have now nothing to eat after a couple of months- what do you intend to do with them- take them home and keep them in you TV room??
Look, you appear, by the way you write, to be quite young, we were all young once and we all wanted to save the world and thought that we could.
Newsflash: You can’t save the world. You can’t even save all the horses and, noble though your sentiments are, they are only that- sentiments.
What this rescue did was irresponsible to the point of lunacy. They have save ONE horse to the detriment of all the others.
How can you think that is right?
I am very aware of the fact that we cant save the world, I might be ‘quite young’ but im not senseless, I have been following updates on the mares recovery, when I said that she “sitting in her stall munching hay” I was actually very correct, she was introduced to small amount of hay at the time that I first wrote what I originally said, and she is still very much alive.
I adopted a 12 year old Standardbred gelding, rescued from an auction house, since then I have realized that no life should be considered useless no matter the age or condition. Every horse deserves to get cared for, if the person that is responsible for that horse can do so. The fact that she is a Standardbred doesnt make her any different, I have the pleasure of owning a Standardbred and would take one over an expensive show horse anyday.
Yes, they did say that they will run out of feed after a certain amount of time, but NO, not one horse went unfed. They manage to get more food and fed the horses in their care.
NEWSFLASH: I never ONCE stated that I could save the world or all the horses. This horse, no matter her age or breed deserved to be saved. We cant save all the horses, but we sure as hell can save and change that one horses life. Why save her from slaughter to just let her die. Stop judging what this rescue did, and maybe think about the positive side. Not that hard to do
I own and run a small private rescue. Almost all costs are borne by myself – a few friends donate a few $$$ and time, but I make sure that I have enough money to cover the costs myself at all times since I don’t feel it’s appropriate to rely completely on others good will for ‘my’ animals security.
The last colic I had was two years ago. Lovely 7yo mare, good conformation, great breeding, fabulous temperament, nothing wrong with her, potential to become a competition horse or quality broodmare. Colic seemed pretty mild, but the vet checked with me if I would be likely to do surgery if it was needed, as they would give her different drugs if that was the case. The immediate answer was No, no surgery – I couldn’t guarantee I had the funds for that sort of thing (and if I did there would have been three extra horses in my paddocks!). For me it was a no-brainer. If the drugs hadn’t worked, she’d have gone to the Rainbow Bridge.
This applies to ALL the horses here – if the vet bill is likely to be more than $500, I’ll almost certainly have the horse PTS instead, and all my friends who help out while I’m away know this and are authorised to make appropriate arrangements if needed. I’m gradually working through the process of becoming a registered charity, setting up a website, etc and looking for donations, but even if I had a fat bank balance I’d still be unlikely to go to great expense on a rescue horse. Maybe if I won Lotto or something and had a few million in my pocket, but otherwise? No.
And then just a few months after Anna coliced, I was talking to a client, who happily admitted she had flat out LIED to the vets about having enough $$$ for colic surgery for her mare – she was dead broke, and racked up over 10 grand in vet bills on a nothing-special mare (okay, ‘the love of her life’, but still…). She had no qualms in taking their time, expertise, drugs, surgery use etc with no plan or ability to play in the near future. I think she is still paying off the bill years later, after having sold the mare for a measly $500 last summer.
Claire Vale
Kahurangi Equine Rescue
New Zealand
Well, she wasn’t a rescue case but an old Morgan mare named Tess was put down a couple of weeks ago at our barn. She’d come to the barn at 4 years old and was humanly euthanized at 36. She was used competitively for a majority of her life and did pretty well. Once she left the show ring, she began work as a lesson horse. When she had served many years as our most reliable, bomb-proof horse she was finally retired to pasture where she got to live out the rest of her fat, happy days being spoiled rotten. But in the last year, her age was catching up to her and her health was slowly but steadily declining. The decision was made to humanly euth her while she was still comfortable – she’d lived her entire life in comfort and she was going to die that way too. She’d never experienced a moment of cruelty in her life, and she was loved by all who met her. She was the kind of horse who loved people – whether you had treats or not. She was one of the greatest horses (more like a hony, she was only 14.1hh) that I have and probably will ever meet.
RIP Tess:
http://i957.photobucket.com/albums/ae57/fancysnake/DSCN4934.jpg
In that same week we lost one of our other mares – an Appendix mare named Laya – was put down at the age of 27 due to a leg injury. Our barn owner made the comment that she was the first horse in a very long time that had not made it to 30 years old, it was quite a shame too. She was 27, but was a spitfire and an excellent lesson horse. I’m pretty sure she used to compete and win as well – she was a heck of a jumper!
RIP Laya:
http://i957.photobucket.com/albums/ae57/fancysnake/Laya.jpg
As for the thread question, I think they should have made her as comfortable as possible and given her a humane euthanization. While it would be sad and the horse certainly deserved to live as much as any other, the money that was spent to save that one horse’s life could have been used to save several others. I’m happy the horse was saved and seems to have a chance at a new start in life, but it was one horse being saved versus several. Of course, I have no rescue experience aside from rehabbing my kitten (found starved, dirty and made of more fleas than cat in a parking lot) and maybe when you’ve had rescue experience, you get a different perspective. But from my stand point, I think she should have been quietly and peacefully laid to rest.
Taking a step back even further – 19 + standardbred = salvageable? Barely in my book, unless there’s a dearth of slaughter horses to pick from and an abundance of kill buying money + ongoing feed money available. I understand salvage – I do a little of it myself, but 19 and standardbred…. really?
Lunatteo I appreciate your courage in relating your story for us. You behaved in a very responsible way towards both your beloved horse and your family and yourself. Well done. Without knowing your mom but being a mother myself I am very sure that she is proud of you for growing into such a wise and caring woman.
Thank you very much for your saying so. I took a long time before deciding to post here in public because, naturally, how emotionally close the whole thing is still to me. I definitely know I was prepared in my experiences prior to that (witnessing colic cases, suffering and sudden deaths in other horses) to make that decision, but it was not an easy one. So again, thank you for your kind words.
We run a small rescue and try to base everything on the quality of life of each animal. We have come under considerable fire over the years for having our vet humanely put down a large number of horses here. I do believe most people feel that you CAN and SHOULD save them all. They absolutely do not want to believe that death is necessary for the most part and they also want to believe that horses can live forever (as long as they themselves do not have to watch the aging process). People want to donate horses that NEED to be put down and relieved of their suffering. We listen to them cry and make excuses why they can’t do it and then we tell them it is their responsibility to do it. Not saying that is what happened with the 19 year old mare at all. I wasn’t there and have no idea how that all played out so I am not going to judge that decision. I do object to the statements about how the money should have been spent though. Most people who donate funds do so for two reasons. To help the horses and to get a tax deduction. They don’t dictate how many horses should be saved or how the money should be spent unless they are sponsoring a specific horse. If you don’t like how your rescue of choice spent your donation and you feel you should second guess them then next time take the cash down to your local auction and save a few yourself instead. Good rescues take heat every single day for decisions made and sometimes you are damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Just sayin’……