# So: if no PTS, what should we do with useless valueless horses?



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Following on from the PTS thread. 

There are obviously plenty of people who disagree with PTS for 'convenience' as they see it. That's fine.


In the current market there are a HUGE  number of horses who are valueless.  Pretty much any horse who can't be ridden for normal activities (or behavioural or physical reasons) has pretty much no monetary value or use. Some are may be useful for a very competent experienced rider but that type of rider usually wants a talented horse (and it's talent*automatically*gives the horse value).A small (very small)  number will be suitable as a companion. They may have a small value as a breeding animal but surely everyone agrees that overbreeding is what got us in this horse population crisis in the first place. 

It's a sad fact of life that things with little value or use are often cared for less. 'Value' can come from being a much loved pet, but that value only applies to its current owner. 

So, if they're not PTS and the owner no longer wants or is able to keep them:  what should we do with them?

It's a genuine question for those so anti PTS for problem useless horses. Where should they go? Should someone be expected to take them on? How many altruistic owners do you beleive are out there?


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			So, if they're not PTS and the owner no longer wants or is able to keep them:  what should we do with them?




			Let them run free on the moor as we have no wolves in this country LOL

TBH I want to see the answer to this problem because at the end of day there is enough unwanted and neglected horses in this country why do people want to add to this problem
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			Let them run free on the moor as we have no wolves in this country LOL
		
Click to expand...

Be careful what you joke about!  Someone recently said, in all seriousness,  that they'd rather turn their elderly horse free in the forest rather than have it 'unnecessarily' PTS!!


----------



## LD&S (26 January 2014)

I'm not the right person to answer this really as my three much loved horses will be pts when I can no longer care  for them, they have little or no value in the big wide world but even if they did I would't sell. The charities are full and cannot even now take in the hundreds of horses that need a home, companions are ten a penny. 
I will not risk them being shoved from pillar to post and potentially end up being neglected.


----------



## pippixox (26 January 2014)

forgive me if i'm wrong, but pretty sure with dogs that end up in pounds and some charities, if no one wants them (so no value- as spoken about in other post), or if they have health issues or aggression, they are PTS. some are kept in kennels, for more than a year, waiting for a home they will never get. if both my horses have to retire i will keep them, rather than PTS or sell on to get a riding horse. as many horses can be unsound for ridden work but still not in pain. 
sadly the answer really is PTS in many cases. if we had less horses they would all have greater value. i know of a few people who are 'altruistic' and have homed unwanted horses, but do not really have adequate time or money to care for them and ignore bad lameness simply because the horse doesn't need to be ridden- that is not quality of life for a horse.


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			Be careful what you joke about!  Someone recently said, in all seriousness,  that they'd rather turn their elderly horse free in the forest rather than have it 'unnecessarily' PTS!!
		
Click to expand...

That's why I made the joke comment as I saw that post too


----------



## Copperpot (26 January 2014)

I will just keep mine as lawn mowers. I couldn't pts them when they were no longer useful. 

As for dogs a charity did rescue one of mine from a pound and keep him for almost a year in kennels. Thank god they did. He's my dog of a lifetime. He's forgotten his rubbish start to life now and is a very happy boy


----------



## Echo Bravo (26 January 2014)

Some of these do gooders tbh never really think things through, it's just their ideals they think about, like those people who let farmed mink loose and stood by while the mink destroyed the local wild life before the mink went further afield look what they have done to the water voles. They are the people I despise.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			I will just keep mine as lawn mowers. I couldn't pts them when they were no longer useful.
		
Click to expand...

That's great and loads of people do. They have value and use to you as a pet. But say you lost your job and couldn't afford them: then what?


----------



## Magnetic Sparrow (26 January 2014)

I know of at least one case where an elderly thoroughbred mare was turned loose in the New Forest after the owner decided they didn't want it any more :frown3:. People truly think it's an option.

I'm looking forward to seeing what ideas there are for dealing with other people's horses. Apparently I'm trigger-happy, but I'm open to other ideas.


----------



## Kadastorm (26 January 2014)

alot of people told me to pts my (then 6yr old NF) last year. i went against it even though i could have claimed and gotten myself a comp horse like i planned when i sold him. its taken alot of time, money, sweat and tears but he is coming good. even if he didnt, im glad i have kept him as he is my best friend and i couldnt imagine not seeing him everyday.


----------



## zigzag (26 January 2014)

The people who disagree with PTS can pay for them in their own stables if they feel so strongly about it


----------



## catwithclaws (26 January 2014)

I currently keep my old mare on retirement livery. I don't begrudge her any of the money I spend on keeping her healthy and happy in her retirement. However not everybody is in the position to be able to do this, and as others have said, an older unsound horse has no monetary value, and Unfortunately circumstances sometimes occur that are out of anyone's control.

Where do you draw the line though? I have always said that I will not bute my mare up to live in the field. If she cannot just be a horse without being in pain then she will be PTS without question. I would always make a decision that I felt was in her best interests, rather than what was easier for me. JMO though


----------



## hnmisty (26 January 2014)

If I was stinking rich I'd take loads of the poor (but happy and healthy, not cripples that are in constant pain and can't display typical behaviour) and let them live happily in my fields where they would be pampered every day because I'd be so stinking rich I didn't need to work.

Sadly I cannot think of a viable alternative. 

Even though I was able to ride Misty for the last 3 years I had her (6 of the 12 I had her, grew out of her after 3 years then later started taking her out for gentle plods which she LOVED) I was riding her, she was essentially retired for most of the time I had her. However, I kept her at home, free hay and straw, dad's a vet so free jabs. She was probably cheaper to keep than our 3 labs. We always knew she'd be with us until the end, which happened very suddenly. 

However, keeping at home is very much different from paying for livery and having to travel there every day. I could only afford one at livery. I could have faced 20 years of having to pay for livery for a horse I couldn't ride. That's a lot to ask.

Friends always asked me why I didn't have Misty at livery with me when I was at uni. Firstly, neither I nor my parents could have afforded to pay for livery. Secondly, the life she had at was better than that offered at any livery yard I have yet to see. Thirdly, she was settled at home. I couldn't have turned her life upside down by moving her to a yard even if she'd had the consistency of me being there, let alone going to somewhere new with someone new. 

Had there been any reason we could no longer keep her, I would have felt my heart fracture into tiny pieces, and then I would have had her PTS. She didn't deserve the uncertainty of having to settle somewhere new in her 30s.


----------



## blitznbobs (26 January 2014)

Eat them... It seems the obvious answer . I eat cows, sheep, pigs, chickens, ducks, rabbits, geese etc etc. I wouldn't eat my own but would have no objection to this in principle ...


----------



## Polos Mum (26 January 2014)

For those that meet the criteria (age and height) the blood bank is one possible answer - for a select few. 

Somehow stop people breeding so there are fewer ending up in this situation

Educate people to realise the value of older horses as happy hackers and that while they may have asparations to be competing/ hunting etc. in reality a lovely older been there and bought the t-shirt type is truely what they need. Somehow to make the 15 y/o chestnut mare as fashionable as the 3 y/o coloured cob - don't know how we do this.


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (26 January 2014)

blitznbobs said:



			Eat them... It seems the obvious answer . I eat cows, sheep, pigs, chickens, ducks, rabbits, geese etc etc. I wouldn't eat my own but would have no objection to this in principle ...
		
Click to expand...

You can always get someone to pick your old nag up and travel it across Europe to be eaten, is that your idea of a solution?


----------



## Goldenstar (26 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			For those that meet the criteria (age and height) the blood bank is one possible answer - for a select few. 

Somehow stop people breeding so there are fewer ending up in this situation

Educate people to realise the value of older horses as happy hackers and that while they may have asparations to be competing/ hunting etc. in reality a lovely older been there and bought the t-shirt type is truely what they need. Somehow to make the 15 y/o chestnut mare as fashionable as the 3 y/o coloured cob - don't know how we do this.
		
Click to expand...

I rather have the 15 yo chesnut mare myself .


----------



## blitznbobs (26 January 2014)

I'm talking about the young masses who are in sales up and down the country. My ideal solution is not to breed them in the first place but why the transport - we could eat them here...

Btw I've never got rid of a horse that is old and past it's best. I keep them all until their quality of life is poor and it's the right time to pts. However simply saying that this is how it should be doesn't make it so... And what about the poorly bred horses with poor conformation that flood the bottom end of the market what is your solution for them?


----------



## Copperpot (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			That's great and loads of people do. They have value and use to you as a pet. But say you lost your job and couldn't afford them: then what?
		
Click to expand...

Luckily for me my job is very secure. In that case I would move them to the cheapest grass livery I could find and take whatever job I could to keep them. I would fight to keep them. Or I would let my OH pay for their keep until I was in a position to afford them again. There's things I could sell to pay for their keep for at least a year. I'd just do whatever I could to keep them.


----------



## JillA (26 January 2014)

As you know from my comments on the other thread, I have often had to suggest PTS as the only humane option for some "companion" or even rideable horses and ponies. 
One proviso though - it was suggested I have my (home bred) horse shot due to behavioural issues. I didn't and have found most of the answer eventually - he and I have both been on a long journey on which I have learned so very much, if I had given up on him I wouldn't be the horsewoman I am today. So it can pay to see problems as challenges unless age/discomfort/pain dictate that the prognosis really isn't good. And I have my own land so didn't have to shell out week after week on livery for him (and no, that's not altogether luck, it is hard work and determination!!)


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

I agree eating horses could be an option but then we cant worm, vaccinate or give them bute if they going to enter the human food chain so this could cause other issues especially no bute, meaning horses will suffer more.


----------



## be positive (26 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			For those that meet the criteria (age and height) the blood bank is one possible answer - for a select few. 

Somehow stop people breeding so there are fewer ending up in this situation

Educate people to realise the value of older horses as happy hackers and that while they may have asparations to be competing/ hunting etc. in reality a lovely older been there and bought the t-shirt type is truely what they need. Somehow to make the 15 y/o chestnut mare as fashionable as the 3 y/o coloured cob - don't know how we do this.
		
Click to expand...

For every pts thread there is another saying don't buy the 15 year old happy hacker that will not pass the vet unless it is almost free just in case it breaks in a few years time, this is sad as the 15 year old probably will happily go on for another 5-10 years, give endless pleasure and confidence yet it is considered valueless as there will be no resale at the end. I think unless you are a professional you should not expect to get either your money back or a profit when buying a horse, it should be looked at in a similar way to a car, not suggesting they should be treated like one, they may go down in value from day one, there is no guarantee you will get your money back if you sell, let alone make a profit. 

Some way of restricting breeding would be a good step, culling poor quality stock is probably a necessary step which is unlikely but that comes back to pts which is not going to please some.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Kadastorm said:



			alot of people told me to pts my (then 6yr old NF) last year. i went against it even though i could have claimed and gotten myself a comp horse like i planned when i sold him. its taken alot of time, money, sweat and tears but he is coming good. even if he didnt, im glad i have kept him as he is my best friend and i couldnt imagine not seeing him everyday.
		
Click to expand...

Well done and it's always nice to hear of people willing to put the time and tears in. But what would you have done with him if you were unable to fix his problems? Sold him on to someone and hope they could sort him?



catwithclaws said:



			I currently keep my old mare on retirement livery. I don't begrudge her any of the money I spend on keeping her healthy and happy in her retirement. However not everybody is in the position to be able to do this, and as others have said, an older unsound horse has no monetary value, and Unfortunately circumstances sometimes occur that are out of anyone's control.

Where do you draw the line though? I have always said that I will not bute my mare up to live in the field. If she cannot just be a horse without being in pain then she will be PTS without question. I would always make a decision that I felt was in her best interests, rather than what was easier for me. JMO though
		
Click to expand...

That's something many people wish they could offer their own horse. As you say though,  many cannot afford it or aren't willingly to afford it. I suppose it depends how important being able to ride the horse is to you. It's where the line falls between working animal and pet.

I don't think anyone (with any sense) would question putting a suffering horse down. There's always the serious Pro-life idiots who believe in life at ANY cost but thankfully they're few and far between. There's always the grey area of how MUCH the horse is suffering but it's not a huge bone of contention.  The arguments come when the horse is not currently suffering but is useless and valueless. And what lengths people will go to ensure it never does suffer.



blitznbobs said:



			Eat them... It seems the obvious answer . I eat cows, sheep, pigs, chickens, ducks, rabbits, geese etc etc. I wouldn't eat my own but would have no objection to this in principle ...
		
Click to expand...

I entirely agree on horse meat eating but that still requires them to be PTS  



Polos Mum said:



			For those that meet the criteria (age and height) the blood bank is one possible answer - for a select few. 

Somehow stop people breeding so there are fewer ending up in this situation

Educate people to realise the value of older horses as happy hackers and that while they may have asparations to be competing/ hunting etc. in reality a lovely older been there and bought the t-shirt type is truely what they need. Somehow to make the 15 y/o chestnut mare as fashionable as the 3 y/o coloured cob - don't know how we do this.
		
Click to expand...

Bloodbank is a tiny outlet but worth considering.  Over breeding is the main cause of this over population in the first place but it's a very difficult thing to control (and a whole new discussion).  
And sadly, yes an older schoolmaster happy hacker is ideal but they're actually really hard to find and not that cheap! They do have to be sound in mind and body for it. Many of the horses I'd suggest PTS are neither.  Due to the affore mentioned over breeding,  it's a damn sight cheaper and easier to find a 3yr old coloured cob


----------



## hnmisty (26 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			Luckily for me my job is very secure. In that case I would move them to the cheapest grass livery I could find and take whatever job I could to keep them. I would fight to keep them. Or I would let my OH pay for their keep until I was in a position to afford them again. There's things I could sell to pay for their keep for at least a year. I'd just do whatever I could to keep them.
		
Click to expand...

It's great that you have that job security and a supportive OH.

What if you didn't though? What if you were single? Or of you and your partner both lost you jobs and you were at risk of losing your home? What if you had kids to feed and couldn't afford the old knackered horse and food on the table at the same time?

A few years ago it was touch and go whether my dad would lose his job. If he had, we'd have lost our house and everything. I would have searched heaven and hell for a way to keep Misty. And if o hadn't found an answer, I would have PTS. Thankfully the worst didn't happen and we kept her until she got colic. I'd always said the day she had to go through an operation would be the day i said goodbye, and so it was.


----------



## AdorableAlice (26 January 2014)

Dump it in the first field with an open gate seems popular around us.

I have dealt with two, one was an 18 month old colt and very nicely put together type the other was a yearling coloured yak.


----------



## Chestnut horse (26 January 2014)

What if....... who knows.......


----------



## Orangehorse (26 January 2014)

I don't think anyone would PTS a horse that can have a useful life, there are loads of people who want a nice horse to hack, not to jump or go fast but a nice, safe and sound animal.  

The difficulty is with horses that do not meet that criteria either they are ill, lame or difficult in some way, tricky, sensitive, or one person, been badly treated in the past, etc., etc. the reasons are numerous.
The original person who started the other thread is missing the point.  I don't think anyone quickly comes to the point of PTS, but the fact that more and more people seem to be asking the question is just proof that owners are facing up to the realities of life and are finding out what can happen to horses that are passed on to an uncertain future simply because the owner is too squeamish.

Three or four years ago there were the same sorts of threads of "I cannot ride/afford/cope with my horse but I love it, will someone take it off my hands and give it a lovely home." Well yes, there are always people around who will give it a lovely home for a week or so, until it can be sold as a 14 year old ex show jumper to some unsuspecting buyer, or given a good home for 24 hours before it is shipped off to the abbatoir.

I think this is beginning to dawn on owners, yet they naturally still don't want to say "The only thing I can do with this horse is kill it."  So they want support, to be told that this is the right thing to do and in general they get it here.  Sometimes it needs a dispassionate other person to give a considered view.
PTS is not the worst thing that can happen to a horse, kindly in familiar surroundings; it doesn't much matter if it 26 or only 6.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			I agree eating horses could be an option but then we cant worm, vaccinate or give them bute if they going to enter the human food chain so this could cause other issues especially no bute, meaning horses will suffer more.
		
Click to expand...

That is because DEFRA are currently a waste of space when it comes to horses,  not because they can't actually have the wormers etc. Coes/sheep/pigs are all regularly wormed, vaccinated and given pain killers.  It could be sorted.


----------



## olivia x (26 January 2014)

I honestly never encountered the situation of putting a horse to sleep if it was no longer rideable but not in any pain, still in decent health with a good quality of life until I started to read these forums. Most horses I knew from back home in the middle of the vast prairie simply were able to live out their natural days, and if they needed to retire, they did. But there open land is more plentiful and so I think the cost of keeping and maintaining a horse is much less than here. So it is something that might be more economically feasible than it is here in the UK. My first childhood horse died of old age, well into her 30s. My parents made me sell her when I went to uni-- but it took 2 years before we found a home I would accept for her. Her new owner had a cattle ranch, but said he just liked to watch her out his window-- she was an Arabian and beautiful if I may say so! -- and rode her for fun, not to work cattle. She had a 3 sided shed on her field, where she could go in if she wanted for shelter, and she was on about 10 acres with a few other horses for company. This owner sent her on to a little girl and her family, who also had land of their own where they could keep her, and she spent her final days being loved by a little girl again and died of natural causes.

A friend of mine had to put her horse to sleep last year, when his health failed. He had been unrideable for several years before that, but she kept him and her new horse. I think if it had been a choice of having a new riding horse and putting him down, she would never have put him down. She was fortunate enough to be able to keep two. 

I don't know the answer. It is something everyone will determine as an individual. Is a horse without value when it is no longer rideable? Again, a highly individual response likely from people. 

Consider the expense of health care for dogs-- just an ordinary pet dog with no particular "value" other than being a pet, not  a working dog, not a breeding stock dog. Where do you draw the line on what you will spend? Again, individual responses will vary. When I was a post-grad student, I brought home a stray puppy on one winter evening who became very ill with parvo virus. I already had a rescue dog of my own. The vet said the puppy would be likely to pull through it,but the treatment would be expensive. The vet was aware that this was a stray pup, and I was a student without much money. I went in to see the pup, with the idea he would have to be put down, as I could not afford his treatment. He was on an IV but playing in his cage, bouncing around and bright. Well, there was no way on God's green earth I could have him put down, so I worked out a payment plan with the vet-- who halved the cost of treatment-- and scrimped and pinched every penny I had. The puppy lived-- I had no intention of keeping him myself actually but I found a wonderful home for him with a fellow student and his family. 

Much later on, another treasured dog came down with cancer. It was treatable, but expensive. His health was otherwise good. I paid. Of course I paid. He went to a special dog oncologist. I struggled to pay, but I paid. He went on to have a few more healthy years of life before being PTS due to advancing arthritis-- nothing related to the cancer he had had. 

So what would I do with a non-rideable but otherwise healthy horse? Most likely, keep it, love it and look after it and if it meant foregoing having another rideable horse-- then so be it. But that is only me-- and other people will make their own choices for their own reasons. 

I make the choices that seem right for me. They may or may not be what someone else would do.


----------



## Copperpot (26 January 2014)

hnmisty said:



			It's great that you have that job security and a supportive OH.

What if you didn't though? What if you were single? Or of you and your partner both lost you jobs and you were at risk of losing your home? What if you had kids to feed and couldn't afford the old knackered horse and food on the table at the same time?

A few years ago it was touch and go whether my dad would lose his job. If he had, we'd have lost our house and everything. I would have searched heaven and hell for a way to keep Misty. And if o hadn't found an answer, I would have PTS. Thankfully the worst didn't happen and we kept her until she got colic. I'd always said the day she had to go through an operation would be the day i said goodbye, and so it was.
		
Click to expand...

I don't have kids and that's a factor in my having 2 horses. When I first got horses I did split up with my then partner and to house myself, keep the dogs and horses was a struggle.

Don't get my wrong if they were in pain or had no quality of life I would pts. Luckily OH and I have the same job, both secure and over time in abundance so tbh it's not something I gladly have to think about. But if it came to it, like you I would do anything in power to keep them.


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			That is because DEFRA are currently a waste of space when it comes to horses,  not because they can't actually have the wormers etc. Coes/sheep/pigs are all regularly wormed, vaccinated and given pain killers.  It could be sorted.
		
Click to expand...

Ok I didn't realise that I'm not very clued up with DEFRA reqs and other animals in the food chain just new some reason bute and wormers couldn't enter the food chain


----------



## Spook (26 January 2014)

We should be eating them...... whoever said that is quite right.

Not worming???? mmmm well we wormed a batch of fattening cattle not long ago (Ivomec based wormer) and OH just checked the withdrawal period last week...... how long do you think it is? Bearing in mind that horses are wormed with the same drug. And most drugs used do have a withdrawal period.....but just not for horses. I wonder why? could it be to do with the spondulies to be made  out of keeping them trudgeing along, so to speak!!?

Oh and why is it so very expensive to worm a horse compared to a cow??


----------



## Kadastorm (26 January 2014)

kalliebear (sorry on phone so cant quote) no, as soon as i heard from the vets i decided he would never be sold, even now he is coming right, i may part loan him but never will he be completely parted from me as i know that he could end up in the wrong hands. i love him too much to do that to him. he has psd and navicular and he isnt an easy ride and is very cheeky, he has a great personality however, he would turn nasty in the wrong hands.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			Ok I didn't realise that I'm not very clued up with DEFRA reqs and other animals in the food chain just new some reason bute and wormers couldn't enter the food chain
		
Click to expand...

It's not just DEFRA but they don't help.
As spook said, most of the cattle and sheep drugs are exactly the same as horse drugs (but 10x more expensive! ) but they've not had the withdrawn periods researched in horses. And therefore because the withdrawl isn't known, the answer is always 'never'.

Is wormer withdrawal not something like 14days? 


It's noticeable that many replies have shifted back to the 'To PTS or not to PTS' argument, rather than viable alternatives if the owner feels PTS is not an option.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Kadastorm said:



			kalliebear (sorry on phone so cant quote) no, as soon as i heard from the vets i decided he would never be sold, even now he is coming right, i may part loan him but never will he be completely parted from me as i know that he could end up in the wrong hands. i love him too much to do that to him. he had psd and navicular and he isnt an easy ride and is very cheeky, he has a great personality however, he would turn nasty in the wrong hands.
		
Click to expand...

At least you'd never have passed his issues on to someone else. But what would you have done if you couldn't have kept him? (Say for financial issues)


----------



## Kadastorm (26 January 2014)

i have struggled as i lost my job and was out of work for a couple of months. my student loan and the support of my parents meant he never lost out and now i have a job i dont have to worry atm. however, if i really couldnt afford to keep him i do have a friend who has a field with retired horses to turn out on. if that fell through then i would PTS, but this would be the absolute last resort.


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			It's not just DEFRA but they don't help.
As spook said, most of the cattle and sheep drugs are exactly the same as horse drugs (but 10x more expensive! ) but they've not had the withdrawn periods researched in horses. And therefore because the withdrawl isn't known, the answer is always 'never'.

Is wormer withdrawal not something like 14days? 


It's noticeable that many replies have shifted back to the 'To PTS or not to PTS' argument, rather than viable alternatives if the owner feels PTS is not an option.
		
Click to expand...

Like anything horsey its expensive and I suppose withdrawal never been researched as horses have never been thought of as part the human food chain


----------



## blitznbobs (26 January 2014)

Ivermectin withdrawal horses and donkeys for meat = 21 days

Horses are part of the food chain in many countries.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

I have to say it has never actually occurred to me in all the years that I have owned horses, including when I was a student with little income and searching for my first job, that I would not retire a horse that I owned.

Since I know plenty of other people who think and do exactly the same, I can only assume that some people for whom this is an alien or just exceptionally difficult concept must all be hard bitten professional dealers.

Surely this is something you think about when you buy a horse in the first place?

And don't most cats, dogs, rabbits, hamsters and other pets have no use either?  Other than in their company?


----------



## be positive (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			I have to say it has never actually occurred to me in all the years that I have owned horses, including when I was a student with little income and searching for my first job, that I would not retire a horse that I owned.

Since I know plenty of other people who think and do exactly the same, I can only assume that some people for whom this is an alien or just exceptionally difficult concept must all be hard bitten professional dealers.


Surely this is something you think about when you buy a horse in the first place?

And don't most cats, dogs, rabbits, hamsters and other pets have no use either?  Other than in their company?
		
Click to expand...

So how many horses do you now have living happily in retirement?


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

be positive said:



			So how many horses do you now have living happily in retirement?
		
Click to expand...

One.  Out of three.

This one jumps out of fields, is impossible to lead but is very nice to ride and his hocks are beginning to show signs of wear and tear.  He is also a very big horse.  

So, since I'm still on livery, I've moved him to a place that can accommodate him, and have previously had extremely high fencing built to ensure he cannot jump out.  I lead him in a bridle, which is perfectly doable as long as you can be bothered to put it on.  I have learned so much from learning to deal with his quirks - he had been passed from home to home before I got him.  Yes, I could have had him killed because he is in his late teens when he stopped jumping and I got a new horse, but I would only do that if he was in pain and suffering or being subjected to ridiculously heavy veterinary intervention to keep him going.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			I have to say it has never actually occurred to me in all the years that I have owned horses, including when I was a student with little income and searching for my first job, that I would not retire a horse that I owned.

Since I know plenty of other people who think and do exactly the same, I can only assume that some people for whom this is an alien or just exceptionally difficult concept must all be hard bitten professional dealers.

Surely this is something you think about when you buy a horse in the first place?

And don't most cats, dogs, rabbits, hamsters and other pets have no use either?  Other than in their company?
		
Click to expand...

The argument that small pets are just companions is not valid. They do not cost even a tiny fraction of what a horse does and, more importantly,  they were always taken on with the sole intention of being nothing more than a companion pet.  Very very few people buy a horse as just a pet. Almost everyone wants to ride.  

The problems then come when you can no longer ride them. I'd image that most people have all fingers and toes crossed that their beloved horse will retire at 25yrs old happy and healthy.  I'd imagine many would then happily retire them and foot the cost.  If they won't (because riding is of a higher priority) then their choice is to sell/give away or have PTS. I personally think giving away/selling a useless horse is very wrong and therefore my recommendation would be PTS. The opnion on their priority to ride is a different argument. 

That's an old horse, many of whom feel have earned retirement. Why what about a youngster,  either too injured to do a useful ridden job, or too behaviourally messed up. Then what? Would you expect someone who has to pay livery to keep an unsound 4yr old for the next 20yrs? 

I have both. I have my own land, enough to keep 2 horses easily. I couldn't really afford another.. I have an older girl who was a superstar for me in her younger days.  She is almost retired, owes me nothing and will live out her days pottering around until.she starts to suffer.

However I also have a big and stupid 3yr old. If he snapped a tendon tomorrow and would never be sound,  I'm afraid he'd be PTS.  He's not spending the next 25yrs doing nothing in my field.  I certainly would never sell him on.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			One.
		
Click to expand...

Lucky horse. How many horses do you have in total?  I'm pretty sure you have a ridden horse. Like everyone,  you must have a limit on the number of horses you can afford. 3 maybe? 4? And if they all (god forbid) became unridable? You retire all of them and stop riding?


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			The argument that small pets are just companions is not valid. They do not cost even a tiny fraction of what a horse does and, more importantly,  they were always taken on with the sole intention of being nothing more than a companion pet.  Very very few people buy a horse as just a pet. Almost everyone wants to ride.
		
Click to expand...

Actually that's not a valid argument either.  Horses are one of the few "pets" that there is a whole industry built around where you can relatively easily find people to pay them to look after them for you.  Its called livery.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			Lucky horse. How many horses do you have in total?  I'm pretty sure you have a ridden horse. Like everyone,  you must have a limit on the number of horses you can afford. 3 maybe? 4? And if they all (god forbid) became unridable? You retire all of them and stop riding?
		
Click to expand...

Three.  And do you know what, if I was that unlucky to end up with 3 unridable horses, then yes, I would give up riding, because I value life over a nice hack in the countryside or a pretty rosette.  They've already done enough to earn their retirement anyway.


----------



## be positive (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			One.
		
Click to expand...

I thought there would be more the way you were describing the many years of owing horses and keeping them in retirement, I have kept all of my competition horses, luckily I have my own land, just the one retiree now and one that may have to retire before he even really got going, they are the more difficult as he is certainly not mature enough to retire gracefully.

I do not think it is something people think about when buying, especially younger people that are far from retiring themselves they do not think that far ahead, it is not like getting a dog or cat, many horses live far longer than a dog.


----------



## SarahF (26 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			Somehow to make the 15 y/o chestnut mare as fashionable as the 3 y/o coloured cob - don't know how we do this.
		
Click to expand...

I'd take a 15 yo Chestnut Mare any day!  (no offence coloured cobbers!)


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			Actually that's not a valid argument either.  Horses are one of the few "pets" that there is a whole industry built around where you can relatively easily find people to pay them to look after them for you.  Its called livery.
		
Click to expand...

 Think you missed the part about cost. As you'll know, livery isn't cheap and therefore becomes a very important deciding factor in your decision to keep or get rid of a horse.  And if you pay someone else to care for your horse  rather than do it yourself, they hardly count as 'companion animals' do they?


----------



## Luci07 (26 January 2014)

Just to go back to the pounds first..,pounds legally only keep a dog for 7 days, not a year. After 7 days, the dog needs to have been collected by the owner OR found a space in a rescue. Some pounds rehome directly to the public, most won't risk it. Please don't assume they only PTS old or behaviourally challenged dogs. They don't, they PTS around 70-80 dogs a day and the vast majority are young ( out of the puppy stage) dogs. 

As for the PTS argument, you can't judge someone else and their decision.  I made the decision to keep my mare in retirement livery with a friend which is effectively part livery. She lived out happily in the summer, dropped weight and was miserable come winter so I have had to change my plans, I owe this mare as she helped me reach my goal of getting to novice out eventing. If I now had a situation (and I hope I don't have this ever) whereby my young horse became a field ornament the bank would break and I could not keep 2 horses on livery and be unable to ride and do what I want to do. Selfish? Or realistic?


----------



## minesadouble (26 January 2014)

I haven't read the whole of this thread. 
But my view is that if a horse has given you his best years and can no longer perform to the level you desire you owe it to him to do the best you can for him in his twilight years.
We have a 13.2 NF pony that took my daughter from being a mediocre, slightly nervous, non jumping rider to being a confident capable rider, capable of jumping 1m plus tracks in a matter of months.
He is now retired and slightly arthritic in front. Useless, yes, but perfectly happy in pampered retirement. It would be more convenient for us to PTS and use his stable for a horse in work. But I would no more get rid of him than I would my own mother. We owe him big style and will treasure him until the day he dies.


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Got to say expect mentioning horses should be in food chain which still requires them to be PTS no-one who is anti-PTS a useless/un-ridable horse has come forward with an idea


----------



## Goldenstar (26 January 2014)

be positive said:



			For every pts thread there is another saying don't buy the 15 year old happy hacker that will not pass the vet unless it is almost free just in case it breaks in a few years time, this is sad as the 15 year old probably will happily go on for another 5-10 years, give endless pleasure and confidence yet it is considered valueless as there will be no resale at the end. I think unless you are a professional you should not expect to get either your money back or a profit when buying a horse, it should be looked at in a similar way to a car, not suggesting they should be treated like one, they may go down in value from day one, there is no guarantee you will get your money back if you sell, let alone make a profit. 

Some way of restricting breeding would be a good step, culling poor quality stock is probably a necessary step which is unlikely but that comes back to pts which is not going to please some.
		
Click to expand...


You cant get your money back when you have a holiday the moment I buy a horse I consider the money gone .
On the older happy hackers I see some older horses literally limping round the roads I would never pass on one of my older horses and risk this fate for it there's one I see a fair bit near my mums I wince everytime .
People do buy these older horses and are then shocked when they discover it has arthritis and the bill reaches £1000 very quickly and the costs are on going that's the risk you take but you must be able to afford this cost before you take on this type of horse and realise that you may be unlucky and be into all of that very quickly .


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			Got to say expect mentioning horses should be in food chain which still requires them to be PTS no-one who is anti-PTS a useless/un-ridable horse has come forward with an idea
		
Click to expand...

You're right, many have lost the point of my question. I wasn't asking if you'd retire your useless horse if you COULD (of course you would) but what you'd do with the useless horae if you COULDN'T retire it.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			Think you missed the part about cost. As you'll know, livery isn't cheap and therefore becomes a very important deciding factor in your decision to keep or get rid of a horse.  And if you pay someone else to care for your horse  rather than do it yourself, they hardly count as 'companion animals' do they?
		
Click to expand...

That's why you do them yourself in then.  Yes, I do realise that two horses at DIY is more than one.  More effort.  More time.  More money.  More bother.  Yes, I am aware of all that.  Yes I realise you will have more free cash to spend if you pts the one you can't ride any more and more time.  Aware of all that.  Yes.


----------



## windand rain (26 January 2014)

and that question no one has answered even with a silly suggestion Tells you a lot I think


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			You're right, many have lost the point of my question. I wasn't asking if you'd retire your useless horse if you COULD (of course you would) but what you'd do with the useless horae if you COULDN'T retire it.
		
Click to expand...

Why don't you save yourself the bother of all the inquisitions and just write down what you would like people to do?

There is obviously some precisely worded response that you think people should come up with, otherwise they are being very stupid, and you will not be satisfied until you have led them to it by a series of questions which you have them answering like a mother with a child on the naughty step.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

be positive said:



			I thought there would be more the way you were describing the many years of owing horses and keeping them in retirement, I have kept all of my competition horses, luckily I have my own land, just the one retiree now and one that may have to retire before he even really got going, they are the more difficult as he is certainly not mature enough to retire gracefully.
		
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to feel persecuted.  If you would like to check back (which you probably will, since its the sort of thing people do on here), you will get to the bit where in a previous thread where I say that I have either made the decision to sell horses before they reached the age of 11 or 12, or keep them beyond that and retire them.


----------



## Spring Feather (26 January 2014)

be positive said:



			So how many horses do you now have living happily in retirement?
		
Click to expand...

Can't speak for Mithras but I have loads lol!  Enough of my own and a fair few retirement liveries stay with me on my farm.  I'm a total sucker for old animals though.


----------



## weebarney (26 January 2014)

olivia x said:



			So what would I do with a non-rideable but otherwise healthy horse? Most likely, keep it, love it and look after it and if it meant foregoing having another rideable horse-- then so be it. But that is only me-- and other people will make their own choices for their own reasons. 

I make the choices that seem right for me. They may or may not be what someone else would do.
		
Click to expand...

You sound just like me.
 I was brought up to realise a pet is for life. 
My horse life generally revolves around owning four horses most of which are unrideable, but I will keep them regardless until they die.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (26 January 2014)

be positive said:



			Some way of restricting breeding would be a good step, culling poor quality stock is probably a necessary step which is unlikely but that comes back to pts which is not going to please some.
		
Click to expand...


Going back to having every stallion licensed would help, although if DEFRA policed that scheme as well as they police passports ................

I agree that far more people should buy older horses, we might not see so many 'lost my confidence' threads on here.  I bought a sound, healthy 17 yr old and am fully expecting to keep her into her 30s.  At one time we had 4 mares here, all well over 20, although they were all bought as much younger horses.

I once had an unrideable mare, bought as a 4 yr old, who developed behavioural problems, which eventually proved to be caused by her feed.  We were going to have her pts aged 12, when fortunately we discovered what was causing her problems but we effectively kept her as a companion until she was 24.  Not every-one is in a position to do this and I would far rather they pts than try to palm their horse off onto a charity or send it round the markets, waiting for the meat-man to pick it up.  I have nothing against horses going for meat but from a welfare pov, I'd rather they went straight to the slaughterhouse than via several markets.
And something else we should bring back is the small local slaughterhouse.


----------



## Kallibear (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			Why don't you save yourself the bother of all the inquisitions and just write down what you would like people to do?

There is obviously some precisely worded response that you think people should come up with, otherwise they are being very stupid, and you will not be satisfied until you have led them to it by a series of questions which you have them answering like a mother with a child on the naughty step.
		
Click to expand...

Don't have a strop just because you can't or won't answer the question: what would you do if you couldn't retire your useless horse?  You've decided you would retire,  at all costs?  That's quite admirable. It's a shame more don't.
Spring feather: when I was in the USA I went to see a huge herd of oldies living on hundreds of acres..  They were just so peaceful and happy. It'd be nice to have that kind of land over here.


----------



## honetpot (26 January 2014)

I think people are being totally unrealistic about horses purchase, people chose sexual partners and spouses and most put a lot of thought into it but can end up being disappointed and ending the relationship. So your unhappy in your marriage you can leave but if you have bought a horse you have to keep it until it dies or you are destitute! Some will say you should have thought about that when you bought it, but the fact is most people don't, riding for most is a sport at the start not a life time commitment.
  I have a friend who always sells her animals before they are ten, because she doesn't want the responsibility of an older animal. I can not see what is so bad about having an animal PTS where as selling it to someone is a far more risky as many people over estimate their ability and knowledge.
  I think riding will eventually become the elitist sport it was when I was a child in the 70's, then you had to have very well off parents or a family with land to own a pony. Where I went to school the only girl who had her own pony, her father had won the pools. No one wants to pay the real cost of livery and with insurance issues, there will just not be the cheap DIY livery which seems everyone wants.


----------



## olivia x (26 January 2014)

For some people, horses DO count as companion animals.  For others, the utility of the horse begins and ends with its rideability. If you count it as a companion animal you are likely to make a different choice-- as it will not be seen as "useless" when it cannot be ridden. Some people like horses because they like to ride-- some like to ride because they like horses. Depending on your view on it all, you will "value" the horse in a different way. For some people, a horse has "value" whether rideable or not-- perhaps not market value, but a deeper kind of value that has no price.


----------



## be positive (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			I'm beginning to feel persecuted.  If you would like to check back (which you probably will, since its the sort of thing people do on here), you will get to the bit where in a previous thread where I say that I have either made the decision to sell horses before they reached the age of 11 or 12, or keep them beyond that and retire them.
		
Click to expand...

I was just interested as you are very clear on your views, no interest in checking back, there does come a point beyond which I think they are owed a retirement and it is not fair to sell them but everyone will have a different opinion on when that stage is reached, if they ever really think about it and I think that the lack of forethought is the issue and that will not change when it is so easy to go out and buy a horse, on a whim sometimes.


----------



## LaMooch (26 January 2014)

Pearlsasinger said:



			I agree that far more people should buy older horses, we might not see so many 'lost my confidence' threads on here.  I bought a sound, healthy 17 yr old and am fully expecting to keep her into her 30s.  At one time we had 4 mares here, all well over 20, although they were all bought as much younger horses.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think age should be issue to a certain extend when buying a horse especially if you want a schoolmaster/happy hacker. My old share was 14 yrs old ex racer who is now 20 and still ride just don't share now and he taught me so much on bonding and understanding a horse more then what a learnt riding 4/5 year old horses at work. Problem today is people want something that lasts so go for something younger with less mileage and we know that isn't always the case as it is with horses


----------



## Copperpot (26 January 2014)

That is what some of is are saying, we would keep them at all costs. One of mine has been mostly retired since he was 9 due to djd of the hocks. I could do little bits with him but tend not to bother. He lives out and keeps himself mobile. If he lives that way for another 15 years so be it. He's my horse and I love him. He was good enough for me when he was hunting and dragging me over hedges I didn't want to jump and he's good enough for me now. Every so often I take him out for a little hack and duly reminds me why I don't like riding him when he's not been in full work 

I'm not saying everyone should feel the same but my opinion is I would do whatever it necessary to keep my animals. They aren't just part of my life they pretty much are my life.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			Don't have a strop just because you can't or won't answer the question: what would you do if you couldn't retire your useless horse?  You've decided you would retire,  at all costs?  That's quite admirable. It's a shame more don't.
Spring feather: when I was in the USA I went to see a huge herd of oldies living on hundreds of acres..  They were just so peaceful and happy. It'd be nice to have that kind of land over here.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't said that and I have answered your question, in detail, several times.  

How many times do you want the same question answered?

I don't mean to be rude, but when you go out socially with horsy people, or even people who have friends or like animals, what sort of conversations do you actually have with them?


----------



## MrsElle (26 January 2014)

I currently have four horses, three are not ridden.  Of the two on loan from WHW, one is a wobbler and can't be ridden, the other is only three this year, but may never be able to be ridden due to 'issues'.  My own two, one is a TB who since leaving the stud at the age of three has had 8 homes in the four years since.  She hasn't been schooled, but is an ok hack.  She also doesn't load after being beaten into a lorry at some point.  The other is an elderly Shettie who is extremely difficult to catch as she has also been ill treated and is very timid and frightened.  

As you can tell from the above, riding or not riding isn't an issue with me, and I hope that all four stay with me until the day they die.  The only time I would consider pts was if I financially couldn't afford my two (the WHW two would go back obviously) and I couldn't find them a suitable loan home.  I would absolutely not put my TB through another move, she is a smashing girl for me, but there are plenty more cheap TB's out there who have much more potential than she.


----------



## weebarney (26 January 2014)

My current lot are 
28 yo pony - retired
24 yo pony -almost totally retired
17 yo ex racer- retired as he's a liability 
6 yo pony- recovering from malnutrition by previous owner so only walking in hand at the moment. 

In 18 years of horse ownership only sold 2 horses who were unsuitable for me and had 2 pts due to major injuries sustained while turned out. 

This thread is getting a bit silly with the 'what if this or that happens?'


----------



## millikins (26 January 2014)

minesadouble said:



			I haven't read the whole of this thread. 
But my view is that if a horse has given you his best years and can no longer perform to the level you desire you owe it to him to do the best you can for him in his twilight years.
We have a 13.2 NF pony that took my daughter from being a mediocre, slightly nervous, non jumping rider to being a confident capable rider, capable of jumping 1m plus tracks in a matter of months.
He is now retired and slightly arthritic in front. Useless, yes, but perfectly happy in pampered retirement. It would be more convenient for us to PTS and use his stable for a horse in work. But I would no more get rid of him than I would my own mother. We owe him big style and will treasure him until the day he dies.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't finished reading all the threads yet so sorry if you've posted more. I assume that you have the space/funds to have another mount for your daughter or has a promising young rider had to give up until the retired pony dies of old age?


----------



## Tinypony (26 January 2014)

I'm not going to judge anyone for their choices, life is hard sometimes and the unforseen happens.
Speaking for myself, when the horse I'd planned to be riding for many years to come became "useless and valueless" at six years old I kept her in retirement.  First with me and then with a friend of mine, and she's still there now.  When I purchased her as my once-in-a-lifetime dream riding horse I felt I could afford to keep her, so when she couldn't be ridden I could still afford to keep her.
Luckily for me I ended up owning others, but I wouldn't  have purchased my riding horse to replace her if it had meant that I couldn't afford to pay for my Crystal Fire to live out her days happily.  At some point she's going to get uncomfortable and lose quality of life, then I'll make the tough decision.  If I couldn't afford to keep her myself, and therefore couldn't be sure of her future, I'd make the tough decision.  At one point it looked as if I'd have to reduce numbers due to finances, and the one I was thinking of selling was the one who had a useful ridden future (sob!).  I know that's not a strictly logical choice, but I can't be strictly logical about living creatures that I love.  I wouldn't have put Fire to sleep in order to keep Celebrity to ride.


----------



## Mithras (26 January 2014)

millikins said:



			I haven't finished reading all the threads yet so sorry if you've posted more. I assume that you have the space/funds to have another mount for your daughter or has a promising young rider had to give up until the retired pony dies of old age?
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps the promising young rider will learn better values from dealing with a pony which has been retired after doing well than being taught the attitude that living creatures are disposable things once they are no longer convenient to you, to be replaced and thrown away like a pair of shoes?

Perhaps the promising young rider has been asked to ride someone else's pony or horse, or got a share or a loan?


----------



## Copperpot (26 January 2014)

Mithras said:



			Perhaps the promising young rider will learn better values from dealing with a pony which has been retired after doing well than being taught the attitude that living creatures are disposable things once they are no longer convenient to you, to be replaced and thrown away like a pair of shoes?

Perhaps the promising young rider has been asked to ride someone else's pony or horse, or got a share or a loan?
		
Click to expand...

Well said!


----------



## Spring Feather (26 January 2014)

millikins said:



			I haven't finished reading all the threads yet so sorry if you've posted more. I assume that you have the space/funds to have another mount for your daughter or has a promising young rider had to give up until the retired pony dies of old age?
		
Click to expand...

Like minesadouble, we also have kept my daughters childhood super-duper pony that she has long since grown out of.  Heck we even flew the pony half way round the world to remain as part of our family.  Fab little pony who has been retired for many years and is quite happy pottling around our fields.  Daughter has 4 horses of her own so she keeps her hand in at remaining a pretty decent rider, and yes I suspect we'll have these 5 till they pop their clogs too lol!


----------



## Goldenstar (26 January 2014)

I had my first pony till he died he was very healthy until he was found dead by my neighbour .
He missed moving to the GS hacienda by about three weeks  we had a lovely skinny paddock and shed all sorted for him he never got away from DIY hell I have always been sad about that he would loved it here .
He was an acquired taste he had an evil streak.


----------



## Gloi (26 January 2014)

My current pony is 25 and fortunately still pretty fit and happily hacking about. I do wonder what I'll do when I can no longer ride him. I've had him most of his life and there is no way I'll have him pts unless he is ill, but I don't really have the money to keep two. I'll probably end up riding one of my friend's or take on something to train during the summer months that will cover its costs.


----------



## Goldenstar (26 January 2014)

Gloi said:



			My current pony is 25 and fortunately still pretty fit and happily hacking about. I do wonder what I'll do when I can no longer ride him. I've had him most of his life and there is no way I'll have him pts unless he is ill but I don't really have the money to keep two. I'll probably end up riding one of my friend's or take on something to train during the summer months.
		
Click to expand...

Staying riding mine was not really an option I got him when I was six or seven and was 29 when he died I had somewhat outgrown him .


----------



## jeeve (27 January 2014)

PTS is the most humane option and takes more balls, and shows more consideration to the horse than passing the problem on to someone else, or abandoning the animal to its fate. But some times a horse may not have a value to its owner, but have a value or use for someone else. This should be considered before the PTS option.


----------



## weebarney (27 January 2014)

jeeve said:



			PTS is the most humane option and takes more balls, and shows more consideration to the horse than passing the problem on to someone else, or abandoning the animal to its fate. But some times a horse may not have a value to its owner, but have a value or use for someone else. This should be considered before the PTS option.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent point


----------



## baymareb (27 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			So, if they're not PTS and the owner no longer wants or is able to keep them:  what should we do with them?

It's a genuine question for those so anti PTS for problem useless horses. Where should they go? Should someone be expected to take them on? How many altruistic owners do you beleive are out there?
		
Click to expand...

I think people have a lot of trouble imagining putting to sleep a healthy animal. Unfortunately, in my opinion the alternatives are worse. For myself, when I acquire any animal, be it horse, dog or cat, or any other, I consider it my responsibility for its lifetime. Therefore, I don't overextend myself with animals and I plan ahead for their old age. I keep and care for them until they no longer have a positive quality of life and then I let them go with the help of my vet and euthanasia drugs.

However, the reality is that there are literally millions of unwanted animals out there and it does them no favors to simply keep them alive without any real quality of life - if that is even possible. Who is to pay for it? Who is to provide that care? It's great that rescues or retirement homes exist but they cannot take care of them all and I would not like to play the odds that the animal I care about but can't keep will end up in a good situation.

My opinion is that the responsible things to do as an owner are: 

1. Don't get animals when you can't afford to keep them.
2. Don't breed your animals unless you are prepared to keep all the offspring for the duration of their lives in the event they are not marketable.
3. If you get in a situation where you cannot keep them, do your best to find a suitable, safe and secure home for them.
4. If they have health, behavioral, or other issues that make it impossible to do the above, put them to sleep so they do not end up suffering in a bad situation.

I don't think anyone is "pro-PTS" - but I do think it is a responsible position to take in certain circumstances.


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

Spook said:



			We should be eating them...... whoever said that is quite right.

Not worming???? mmmm well we wormed a batch of fattening cattle not long ago (Ivomec based wormer) and OH just checked the withdrawal period last week...... how long do you think it is? Bearing in mind that horses are wormed with the same drug. And most drugs used do have a withdrawal period.....but just not for horses. I wonder why? could it be to do with the spondulies to be made  out of keeping them trudgeing along, so to speak!!?

Oh and why is it so very expensive to worm a horse compared to a cow??
		
Click to expand...

One reason it is expensive for horses is that you are buying one not 100, also there is a lot more ongoing research and stuff for horses, and marketing cost will be greater.
Owners can elect to have horse enter the food chain, but there are no facilities round here, and even of there were,  no way would I send a horse to a slaughterhouse without being sure things were done properly. Which means I would have to go and inspect the process myself, not nice.
I don't know if anyone has answered the question, as they say "eat" or "keep" but this is not practical.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

Don't know how many times I have said this but as someone with a useful but elderly horse as long as he is enjoying life and reasonably happy and I can afford him I will keep him. If I were to lose my job and couldn't find an affordable solution then he would be PTS. I owe him a peaceful dignified end to our 13 (hopefully more) years together than being shipped on to another home or in known future.

He is on loan at the minute to a fabulous friend as I have had surgery and he is teaching her daughter loads which is I believe his calling in life as he's taught me loads in all our years. He has no monetary value other than being priceless in my eyes and heart but that wouldn't stope doing the right thing by him jot matter how many people slated me.

There are just too many people in this country not willing to take responsibility for their animals and make the hard choice so between that at backyard breeders who breed for the sake of it the horse market is in the state that it's in.

I would have no problem eating horse were it slaughtered in this country in licenced abbatiors and properly managed. I also cannot see the validity of those who argue keeping yourself in poverty or struggling for the sake of which is essentially a hobby.


----------



## Jericho (27 January 2014)

I would find it very to justify retiring a horse and paying for years of livery if it compromised my family. If I had limited budget would I rather feed my children or a horse? Mercenary but realistic. I do find PTS horses that are valueless and completely unrideable very distasteful but there usually is no other viable options if you can not afford them and cannot find someone with a big heart AND deep pockets who can have herds of old horses roaming their estates.   the horse industry is built up around horses being a hobby, which is riding. sadly the horse is the one to suffer when we discard them so quickly when they are no longer useful. It makes me so cross to see all these indiscriminately  little coloured cobs on the market being sold for pennies, must be gone by the weekend etc. people that just breed to make a few quid. It's these people that deserve the wrath of HHo rather than those who make a responsible decision if they can't find a solution for horses that are unrideable. Ideally we would all let our useless horses live out their days in our own lush pastures but that is not the real world. 

Also The argument that we keep dogs for life sadly isn't true either, people do give them up and dogs are far less expensive than horses and do become part of the family as they generally live in a house. Would you keep a small pet at another location and pay for someone else to look after it for many years? I imagine that is a far less common scenario that retired horses at livery. Sorry, rant over and I am another one who didn't really answer the original question...


----------



## w1bbler (27 January 2014)

If PTS is done sympathetically what's wrong with it. The horse has no idea what's happening, that you are now getting rid as its "useless"
I've seen lots of retired horses over the years looking uncomfortable, stood in field, largely ignored, but owner things they are giving a well deserved retirement. 
Don't get me wrong, I've got a 25 year old field ornament, that will be staying until he looks unhappy, he still tries to run & buck with the youngsters in his field & I like having him around. I won't criticise people who don't keep the old & lame though, too many human emotions are put into the decision, the horse has no concept of retirement.


----------



## babymare (27 January 2014)

How i see it is there is no right or wrong opioion .It all comes down to circumstance and the individual.. I applude all who say they will keep till the end in old  age. I also said that but life can change dramatically as mine did.My mare due to sight issues was retired early and in those last years wanted for nothing but then life throw changes at me (some good some i wouldnt wish on worse enemy). I struggled on for sometime before having to make the hardest decision have ever made. Emotinally, financiall, mentally physically i couldnt go on. Given her sight, her stress issues and background I would not or could not pass her on. She was 14. So whilst it may seem an easy option to take to PTS trust me it isnt. So Iwill never critercise anyone for thier beliefs but i still hold opioin that for some horses far worse can happen than being PTS..


----------



## poiuytrewq (27 January 2014)

Oh how I desperately wish there was a really good answer to this question! 
I'm in the position my horse had to retire age 12 last year. He has a companion pony so here I have two "useless" horses but I love them and they are happy enough. 
My own horse is tittering on the edge of retirement/ continue as a light hack possibly on bute he's 14 
Then my daughters pony is possibly going blind which will leave me with 4 retired horses ages 6-14 who in theory I could be providing for for the next 15-20 years and never be able to ride again  this thought kills me but so does the thought of putting them down. The other thing is I have to stable them so they cost a fortune and therefore I have to work 7 days a week. It's a depressing thing to think about!


----------



## Sussexbythesea (27 January 2014)

poiuytrewq said:



			Oh how I desperately wish there was a really good answer to this question! 
I'm in the position my horse had to retire age 12 last year. He has a companion pony so here I have two "useless" horses but I love them and they are happy enough. 
My own horse is tittering on the edge of retirement/ continue as a light hack possibly on bute he's 14 
Then my daughters pony is possibly going blind which will leave me with 4 retired horses ages 6-14 who in theory I could be providing for for the next 15-20 years and never be able to ride again  this thought kills me but so does the thought of putting them down. The other thing is I have to stable them so they cost a fortune and therefore I have to work 7 days a week. It's a depressing thing to think about!
		
Click to expand...

I think people and in this case you and your daughter deserve a good life too and if keeping 4 horses and not being able to enjoy your one and only life that is an incredible waste too. 

I was in a similar position albeit with only one young unrideable horse that I had only had 6 months before problems arose. After 2 years and much heartache and soul searching I chose me. Since then I've had a fab 9 years with my current horse who is 19 now and will be with me until the end even if that means I can't have another horse as he has given me so much. If I hadn't had the first one pts I could still be sat here 10 years on having done nothing but watch other people ride.


----------



## Tinypony (27 January 2014)

I've had a look back to the start of this thread.  Op referred to "useless and valueless" horses.  A lot of us have been talking about things like horses being in pain, quality of life etc... but the starting point was about whether they were useful or had a value, and just because a horse is neither of those things, it doesn't follow that the horse is suffering in any way.  The two aren't always linked.

Others are talking about animals that are being unwanted getting passed from hand to hand and into an uncertain future.  That's a horrible prospect, but of course we're not talking about that situation here are we?  Most, if not all of us, are referring to our personal circumstances and what we would do.  So I'm sure nobody here is going to admit that they'd send a useless or valueless horse off into the unknown when we couldn't use it any more.

Then we have the "unable to afford/justify/sacrifice other areas of our lives..." to keep said horse.  I'm assuming that when we buy that horse as a fit and possibly valuable animal most of us foresee being able to afford to keep it.  So what changes when the horse suffers a mishap, or just gets old?  Does the bank account suddenly shrivel and vanish?  Of course sometimes finances have changed, but more often the owner needs to get rid of the horse because they are never going to be able to ride it again, they might want to replace it with a useful model and can't afford to keep both.

As I said before, I'm not judging anyone.  I think we should all accept that this is a matter of our own personal choice.  In most cases an owner who has been paying for and caring for a healthy horse could continue to do that for a retired one.  It might mean they can't afford to keep another to ride, but that's a different argument.  And in all cases the owner has the choice about whether or not to send that retired horse off down the "food chain".  So this isn't really about all those horses who would be better off being put to sleep is it?  It seems to boil down to me as a simple question - if one of our horses was no longer useful or valuable, would we keep it in retirement or have it put to sleep?

Really hard one to face I think.


----------



## Four Seasons (27 January 2014)

In Holland, all useless, homeless, valueless horses go to the horse slaughter, to serve as dogfood or burgers etc. I don't see what the problem is with that. We don't have a huge overhorsing problem over here, because of the slaughter. Sometimes even more humane than putting a horse to sleep! One shot through the head and its done and over with, no nonsense that the horse falls over while slowly slipping away into a deep sleep and hurting itself, while still alive and fully aware. Some horses tend to fight against it, making it even worse for owners.

The horse slaughter over here isn't cruel or terrifying. I have visited a horse slaughter and watched them "slaughter" a few horses. All horses were taken in very calmly, the "slaughterer" pats them and gives them the last bit of love. Then he put his "gun" on the head, horse doesn't even know it's coming and within 1 second its all done and over with. Horse has a purpose, it's meat, bones, hair and therefore has a value. They pay money for horses to be slaughtered. Not much, but 300-400 euro's a horse isn't bad.

If more people would see it this way, the slaughtering horses wouldn't be such a "bad and terrible" thing. Then a market could exist in horse slaughtering in England and the overhorsing would be surely history.


----------



## olivia x (27 January 2014)

Tinypony said:



			I've had a look back to the start of this thread.  Op referred to "useless and valueless" horses.  A lot of us have been talking about things like horses being in pain, quality of life etc... but the starting point was about whether they were useful or had a value, and just because a horse is neither of those things, it doesn't follow that the horse is suffering in any way.  The two aren't always linked.

Others are talking about animals that are being unwanted getting passed from hand to hand and into an uncertain future.  That's a horrible prospect, but of course we're not talking about that situation here are we?  Most, if not all of us, are referring to our personal circumstances and what we would do.  So I'm sure nobody here is going to admit that they'd send a useless or valueless horse off into the unknown when we couldn't use it any more.

Then we have the "unable to afford/justify/sacrifice other areas of our lives..." to keep said horse.  I'm assuming that when we buy that horse as a fit and possibly valuable animal most of us foresee being able to afford to keep it.  So what changes when the horse suffers a mishap, or just gets old?  Does the bank account suddenly shrivel and vanish?  Of course sometimes finances have changed, but more often the owner needs to get rid of the horse because they are never going to be able to ride it again, they might want to replace it with a useful model and can't afford to keep both.

As I said before, I'm not judging anyone.  I think we should all accept that this is a matter of our own personal choice.  In most cases an owner who has been paying for and caring for a healthy horse could continue to do that for a retired one.  It might mean they can't afford to keep another to ride, but that's a different argument.  And in all cases the owner has the choice about whether or not to send that retired horse off down the "food chain".  So this isn't really about all those horses who would be better off being put to sleep is it?  It seems to boil down to me as a simple question - if one of our horses was no longer useful or valuable, would we keep it in retirement or have it put to sleep?

Really hard one to face I think.
		
Click to expand...

Well said. Nicely sums up the crux of the dilemma. As you say, a hard situation to face, and so much of the decision doubtless rests on circumstances of the person at the time, financial and otherwise.


----------



## Hedwards (27 January 2014)

I'm very much of the opinion if you bought a horse, and its no longer useful for its job (ie long term lameness etc.) its your responsiblity to look after it, there isnt an alternative requirement, either pts or look after the horse until the end...


----------



## Kallibear (27 January 2014)

Thank you. Tinypony. I know lots of people would sacrifice things (time and money and being able to ride) to keep a horse with no use or value (other than as a pet). So the question should maybe be 'How much should be we willing to sacrifice to maintain a pet horse? ' That differs from person to person.  And then what should we do when we feel we've sacrificed enough?  I suppose the answer for those very anti-PTS is that you can never sacrifice too much to maintain a pet horse. 





Tinypony said:



			.  So I'm sure nobody here is going to admit that they'd send a useless or valueless horse off into the unknown when we couldn't use it any more.
		
Click to expand...

Interestingly,  only one person has suggested this. Giving a useless and valueless horse away, even if you think it's a safe and caring home. How many homes good homes exist for a difficult/unridable/high maintaince horse?  Are these people kidding themselves or are we just cynical?


----------



## s4sugar (27 January 2014)

Four Seasons said:



			In Holland, all useless, homeless, valueless horses go to the horse slaughter, to serve as dogfood or burgers etc. I don't see what the problem is with that. We don't have a huge overhorsing problem over here, because of the slaughter. Sometimes even more humane than putting a horse to sleep! One shot through the head and its done and over with, no nonsense that the horse falls over while slowly slipping away into a deep sleep and hurting itself, while still alive and fully aware. Some horses tend to fight against it, making it even worse for owners.

The horse slaughter over here isn't cruel or terrifying. I have visited a horse slaughter and watched them "slaughter" a few horses. All horses were taken in very calmly, the "slaughterer" pats them and gives them the last bit of love. Then he put his "gun" on the head, horse doesn't even know it's coming and within 1 second its all done and over with. Horse has a purpose, it's meat, bones, hair and therefore has a value. They pay money for horses to be slaughtered. Not much, but 300-400 euro's a horse isn't bad.

If more people would see it this way, the slaughtering horses wouldn't be such a "bad and terrible" thing. Then a market could exist in horse slaughtering in England and the overhorsing would be surely history.
		
Click to expand...

Not all are slaughtered -a fair few destined for slaughter find there way here via bin end dealers!
I do agree that we should have more abatoirs and no horse should be transported far to slaughter. I have a mare rising 19 who is a pet - she is sound but I don't have chance to ride her & she is far from a novice horse. As I have land & fodder I have no problem keeping her. If push came to shove she would be PTS rather than passed on.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

There are only three things that you can do with useless, worthless horses that will guarantee a future without suffering:

1. Retire at home
2. Send to the blood bank
3. PTS at home


----------



## Buddy'sMum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			There are only three things that you can do with useless, worthless horses that will guarantee a future without suffering:

1. Retire at home
2. Send to the blood bank
3. PTS at home
		
Click to expand...

Not sure about the blood bank option, thought they only took younger horses? And isn't it only putting off the inevitable for a couple of years?


----------



## armchair_rider (27 January 2014)

Hedwards said:



			I'm very much of the opinion if you bought a horse, and its no longer useful for its job (ie long term lameness etc.) its your responsiblity to look after it, there isnt an alternative requirement, either pts or look after the horse until the end...
		
Click to expand...

I agree entirely.

I think that part of the problem with this discussion is that it covers a huge range of circumstances. A 25 year old horse that you've had 15 years with a nice temprament but starting to find being ridden a bit much is a very different proposition to a 6 year old you bought a year ago which has just sustained an injury that makes it unrideable. A ten year old which is sound but has serious behaviour issues is different again. Throw in the enormous variation in people's cirumstances (time, money, riding ambitions) and there really can't be a single right or wrong answer.

Personally I think that over-breeding at the basement end of the horse world is largely a seperate problem to this. If somebody has their 20 year old horse PTS because it's no longer fit to event they aren't going to replace it with a badly put together coloured cob.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Buddy'sMum said:



			Not sure about the blood bank option, thought they only took younger horses? And isn't it only putting off the inevitable for a couple of years?
		
Click to expand...

There are a lot of untrue rumours going round about the blood bank. These are some of them:

They PTS horses when they reach 15 years old. Untrue, they will take horses in up to the age of 15 years, but they will keep them for as long as they have a good quality of life. Fact is, most of the horses there are aged 25 - 30 years, so have had at least 10 - 15 years retirement there already.

They send them to Potters once they cannot use them any more. Untrue. If a horse becomes very ill, or sustains a major injury, they are PTS on site. They never get shipped off to slaughter.

They bleed them until they wobble on their feet. Untrue. Horses can give up to 6 litres of blood without suffering detrimental effects. Blood bank horses give 3 litres (so half of that amount) once a month.


----------



## baran (27 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			Luckily for me my job is very secure. In that case I would move them to the cheapest grass livery I could find and take whatever job I could to keep them. I would fight to keep them. Or I would let my OH pay for their keep until I was in a position to afford them again. There's things I could sell to pay for their keep for at least a year. I'd just do whatever I could to keep them.
		
Click to expand...


Well, lucky old you! A friend thought like that until she split from her husband, lost her job (financial sector) then became disabled. Horse was an unsellable waste of space. In the end a group of us clubbed together to have it put down.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

baran said:



			Horse was an unsellable waste of space.
		
Click to expand...

Nice.


----------



## Janesomerset (27 January 2014)

baran said:



			Horse was an unsellable waste of space.
		
Click to expand...

As wagtail said, nice.
Let's hope no-one ever says that about you.


----------



## Buddy'sMum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			There are a lot of untrue rumours going round about the blood bank. These are some of them:

They PTS horses when they reach 15 years old. Untrue, they will take horses in up to the age of 15 years, but they will keep them for as long as they have a good quality of life. Fact is, most of the horses there are aged 25 - 30 years, so have had at least 10 - 15 years retirement there already.

They send them to Potters once they cannot use them any more. Untrue. If a horse becomes very ill, or sustains a major injury, they are PTS on site. They never get shipped off to slaughter.

They bleed them until they wobble on their feet. Untrue. Horses can give up to 6 litres of blood without suffering detrimental effects. Blood bank horses give 3 litres (so half of that amount) once a month.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. But still, isn't it correct that the few equine blood banks in the UK do only accept well-mannered horses over 15.2 and under the age of 15 years? So not a viable option for many.


----------



## baran (27 January 2014)

Well, if you know of a market for an arthritic nappy traffic shy 11 year old which had been so overweight for so long that it had developed acute arthritis, let me know! At least we had the decency to take care of the problem for our friend/


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Buddy'sMum said:



			Thanks for that. But still, isn't it correct that the few equine blood banks in the UK do only accept well-mannered horses over 15.2 and under the age of 15 years? So not a viable option for many.
		
Click to expand...

Of course. I think that some take them in at 15.2hh, others at 16hh. But I have listed it as an option because there are many horses that WOULD fit into that category and it is a very nice retirement for the right horse. Especially as once there, the horse will never leave the premises. This is something that in my eyes is better than loaning or giving away a horse. Even horses that are sellable cannot be guaranteed such a cast iron future. And that includes those that have significant value.


----------



## Janesomerset (27 January 2014)

Unsellable maybe, but the waste of space comment was OTT. Not the horse's fault he had arthritis, by the sound of it.
A good friend of mine has bad arthritis; maybe I should take care of the problem for him?
My friend's elderly horse has arthritis but she manages him so that he is comfortable.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

baran said:



			Well, if you know of a market for an arthritic nappy traffic shy 11 year old which had been so overweight for so long that it had developed acute arthritis, let me know! At least we had the decency to take care of the problem for our friend/
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to having the horse PTS. I was referring to the disgusting term of phrase you used.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (27 January 2014)

Buddy'sMum said:



			Not sure about the blood bank option, thought they only took younger horses? And isn't it only putting off the inevitable for a couple of years?
		
Click to expand...

yes, to me I'm afraid its still passing the buck-even though the life they have is fine, if the horse takes to it.


----------



## baran (27 January 2014)

Janesomerset said:



			My friend's elderly horse has arthritis but she manages him so that he is comfortable.
		
Click to expand...

Great, but the owner was unable to afford to keep the horse and certainly couldn't afford vet bills.
 Which is why the horse was PTS!


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

MotherOfChickens said:



			yes, to me I'm afraid its still passing the buck-even though the life they have is fine, if the horse takes to it.
		
Click to expand...

Actually, it's not passing the buck. I will be sending my gelding there this year. He WAS down to go last year but I pulled out having rethought my management plan of his condition. Basically he has to be out 24/7 or he completely seizes up and is in a huge amount of pain even with bute. I had taken him on LWVTB 4 years ago (aged 8 at the time) but immediately found lameness in both hocks and severe kissing spine. When I spoke to his owners they said if they took him back they would have him shot. So I spent thousands having him operated on, both his hocks and his back, but although the operations brought him field sound, he was still unrideable. But I decided to retire him as he was a very happy chap and a lovely horse. Then just over a year ago, he stopped being the happy, playful boy I knew and in the winter took a turn for the worst. It was being stabled that was the cause of it and that is why he was put down on the waiting list for the blood bank.

 But when it came to the time he had to go, he was then out 24/7 here and was back to his old self (without bute), so I took him off their list and decided I would try my best to give him 24/7 turn out all year round and retire him here. Unfortunately, the recent wet weather meant I had to close the fields and even though he is going out in the sand for 17 hours a day, even the 7 that he is stabled have seized him up again. The BB have them out 24/7 in the summer and in big free range barns with their established herds in the winter. So I have the choice of PTS at home or send him to the BB. I have chosen the BB. I know he would absolutely relish the life there because I know him well. He is great with vets and needles and excellent to handle.

Also, horses have a useful life at the blood bank. How do you think horses would get blood for transfusions if no horses gave it? How about the serum used for medical research etc? It's hardly passing the buck if it is the best choice for a horse. I would always choose to retire a horse at home ideally, but sometimes, even when someone is willing to do that and has the resources, it is not always possible if the facilities don't suit the horse's condition.


----------



## Janesomerset (27 January 2014)

I am not arguing with what you did. I thought the phrase "waste of space" was a horrible thing to say about any creature.


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

Four Seasons said:



			In Holland, all useless, homeless, valueless horses go to the horse slaughter, to serve as dogfood or burgers etc. I don't see what the problem is with that. We don't have a huge overhorsing problem over here, because of the slaughter. Sometimes even more humane than putting a horse to sleep! One shot through the head and its done and over with, no nonsense that the horse falls over while slowly slipping away into a deep sleep and hurting itself, while still alive and fully aware. Some horses tend to fight against it, making it even worse for owners.

The horse slaughter over here isn't cruel or terrifying. I have visited a horse slaughter and watched them "slaughter" a few horses. All horses were taken in very calmly, the "slaughterer" pats them and gives them the last bit of love. Then he put his "gun" on the head, horse doesn't even know it's coming and within 1 second its all done and over with. Horse has a purpose, it's meat, bones, hair and therefore has a value. They pay money for horses to be slaughtered. Not much, but 300-400 euro's a horse isn't bad.

If more people would see it this way, the slaughtering horses wouldn't be such a "bad and terrible" thing. Then a market could exist in horse slaughtering in England and the overhorsing would be surely history.
		
Click to expand...

I would be quite happy for that as an option, but it seems that we are not sure that the slaughter houses here are good places, and a problem in the UK is that poor animals go through markets first, maybe several times, which is not good. 
In Scotland one has to ask the knackerman to call and uplift, he will also shoot if asked. There is a charge.


----------



## Flame_ (27 January 2014)

Correct me if I'm wrong but I doubt the people against PTS unridable horses would be alright with slaughtering them instead, they're both healthy-ish horses' lives cut short, so if they were it would be a major double standard!


----------



## minesadouble (27 January 2014)

millikins said:



			I haven't finished reading all the threads yet so sorry if you've posted more. I assume that you have the space/funds to have another mount for your daughter or has a promising young rider had to give up until the retired pony dies of old age?
		
Click to expand...

She had a year of not competing when she was out of 13.2 classes as she said (despite her love of competing) she would rather give up competing altogether than part with him (pony was sound and saleable at this point in time). It took over a year to raise the funds for a 14.2 , to be perfectly honest it really made me admire her commitment to the pony who had given her so much pleasure. But yes, ultimately, we did have the funds.

However, had it been a choice of PTS or give up riding there would be no question of putting him down. I myself have only ridden 'borrowed' horses for the last 5 years due to my own elderly mare being retired. She's feeling her age now and I think this could be her last Summer, in which case I will be in a position to buy another riding horse. I couldn't live with myself if I ended her life purely and simply because I missed riding. But each to their own.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Also, horses have a useful life at the blood bank. How do you think horses would get blood for transfusions if no horses gave it? How about the serum used for medical research etc? It's hardly passing the buck if it is the best choice for a horse. I would always choose to retire a horse at home ideally, but sometimes, even when someone is willing to do that and has the resources, it is not always possible if the facilities don't suit the horse's condition.
		
Click to expand...


I am very familiar with the equine blood bank thanks, at least the one up here, and I work in scientific research so know exactly what the blood products are used for. As I said, its not a bad life for those who take to it although a far cry from being kept well at livery. 

Quite often on here the blood bank is offered up as some sort of heaven for unwanted horses. To me for _some_ of these people, it looked as though they couldn't make 'that' choice and would rather someone else did it eventually. You really don't have to justify your choice to me as each is obviously different and if you're happy with it, that's what counts.

As you rightly pointed out, alot of the 'myths' are untrue but they are also PTS as soon as they aren't useful to the business that is farming them and that reason can be that they just aren't doing well in that environment-to think otherwise is nonsense. 

I am not for blanket PTS of anything, I don't take on animals that I can't do right by. I retired one at 9 pretty much and unfortunately had to have him PTS at 11 last year for something unrelated. I have another retired pony who's owner passed the buck on to me. I work very hard to give them all what they need and I've had nearly 3 years of doing that with very little riding and paying livery for them, because of it. But the economy has changed and I'll not judge someone else for their choice if they decide to PTS humanely.


----------



## hnmisty (27 January 2014)

I saw an ad for a horse for sale the other week.

"Has been diagnosed with kissing spines but I can't afford the surgery". £400. It was a nice horse, in the pre-diagnosis photos it was obviously talented enough for most amateur riders to compete to a reasonable level. 

Who was going to pay thousands for the operation given they don't even know that horse? Insurance surely wouldn't cover it, as it's a pre-existing condition.

I saw two options: No one buys it, or someone buys it and decides to ignore the KS issue as they've seen the photos of what the horse can do. This would most likely result in significant pain for the horse, and probably serious injury for the rider.

The owner either needed to keep it, or have it PTS.


----------



## soulfull (27 January 2014)

Always going to be controversial and dependant on individual feelings and situations


I've done all scenarios. Retired he's now 18 bit retired for 4 yrs.  Despite him spending a lot of time lame i felt i owed it to him. Had 8 yrs of fun inbetween his physical problems

I gave one away that was suitable for me
I had one pts as couldn't be fixed and would have sore and miserable retiring
Sold one 

Current mare is a dream. Only had her 3 months. I missed out on a lot of riding and especially RC shows over the last 8 yrs due to lameness, both mine and horses 

I don't want to miss out on much more. I can not afford anymore.  I don't have many years left in
Me to ride.  Horses are my life.   Due to illness the riding keeps me supple enough to do the looking after
 God forbid current horse broke and could not be healed I would not keep her

I would do all I could to see if she could be useful to someone else but if not I would pts

Selfish YES!!!   So shoot me for wanting a life  where I can do what matters more than anything. Ride!!

However ask me the same question in 5 or 6 yrs time when hopefully I will have at last been able to ride for more than a few months at a time and my answer will be different. I will owe her her retirement and not be so desperate to have some fun.


----------



## Goldenstar (27 January 2014)

MotherOfChickens said:



			I am very familiar with the equine blood bank thanks, at least the one up here, and I work in scientific research so know exactly what the blood products are used for. As I said, its not a bad life for those who take to it although a far cry from being kept well at livery. 

Quite often on here the blood bank is offered up as some sort of heaven for unwanted horses. To me for _some_ of these people, it looked as though they couldn't make 'that' choice and would rather someone else did it eventually. You really don't have to justify your choice to me as each is obviously different and if you're happy with it, that's what counts.

As you rightly pointed out, alot of the 'myths' are untrue but they are also PTS as soon as they aren't useful to the business that is farming them and that reason can be that they just aren't doing well in that environment-to think otherwise is nonsense. 

I am not for blanket PTS of anything, I don't take on animals that I can't do right by. I retired one at 9 pretty much and unfortunately had to have him PTS at 11 last year for something unrelated. I have another retired pony who's owner passed the buck on to me. I work very hard to give them all what they need and I've had nearly 3 years of doing that with very little riding and paying livery for them, because of it. But the economy has changed and I'll not judge someone else for their choice if they decide to PTS humanely.
		
Click to expand...

I would not send one of mine to the blood bank that's my choice .


----------



## Marydoll (27 January 2014)

Magnetic Sparrow said:



			I know of at least one case where an elderly thoroughbred mare was turned loose in the New Forest after the owner decided they didn't want it any more :frown3:. People truly think it's an option.

I'm looking forward to seeing what ideas there are for dealing with other people's horses. Apparently I'm trigger-happy, but I'm open to other ideas.
		
Click to expand...

I would personally see that as the worst form of lunacy ever, i love my hrse to much to pts as itll fare much better on a moor  abandoned !!


----------



## EllenJay (27 January 2014)

As I see it there are a limited number of options for an old, unrideable horse.  These are:-

1.	Continue to look after it, the way you always have
2.	Send it to a blood bank (if suitable)
3.	Send it to a retirement home for someone else to look after it
4.	Sell it or give it away to someone else to look after it
5.	Put To Sleep

Option 1 is obviously the ideal, but sometimes this isn&#8217;t possible, whether it is financial problems or time problems or another reason.
Option 2 is only suitable for a very few horses, and obviously only a limited amount of places available.
Option 3 is good if you are sure you can afford the livery costs on-going and that you know your horse can live out in all weathers.
Option 4 is dodgy &#8211; too many crooks out there to be able to guarantee a happy home for your old companion
Option 5 &#8211; if all other options are not suitable, then this is all that is left.


----------



## Marydoll (27 January 2014)

hnmisty said:



			I saw an ad for a horse for sale the other week.

"Has been diagnosed with kissing spines but I can't afford the surgery". £400. It was a nice horse, in the pre-diagnosis photos it was obviously talented enough for most amateur riders to compete to a reasonable level. 

Who was going to pay thousands for the operation given they don't even know that horse? Insurance surely wouldn't cover it, as it's a pre-existing condition.

I saw two options: No one buys it, or someone buys it and decides to ignore the KS issue as they've seen the photos of what the horse can do. This would most likely result in significant pain for the horse, and probably serious injury for the rider.

The owner either needed to keep it, or have it PTS.
		
Click to expand...

I think this is spot on


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			I would not send one of mine to the blood bank that's my choice .
		
Click to expand...

Can I ask why that is, GS? Someone else said that to me the other week but could not give me a reason why. For me it would depend on the horse. My late mare, I wouldn't have sent because she had management issues (laminitis) that would prevent her from being a suitable candidate, as well as not settling well in new surroundings, but also because I couldn't bear to part with her and I was her best hope of some sort of quality of life. My gelding is different. He is far more independent and socially competent. But most of all because I truly believe that the BB would give him the best possible chance of a comfortable and happy life. My only problem I have with it is that I will find it hard to part with him and I will really miss him. He's made things so much easier for me here with managing the other horses, I don't know what I will do without him. But at the moment he is on 2 bute a day (since being on none while out 24/7) and is still quite stiff and not himself. So after talking things through with my vet and having a long chat with the BB I have decided to give it a go. But if there is anything I don't like the look of when I take him, he will be coming back home with me, and I will keep him out 24/7 until I am once more forced to close the fields then he will be PTS.


----------



## MissCandy (27 January 2014)

EllenJay said:



			As I see it there are a limited number of options for an old, unrideable horse.  These are:-

1.	Continue to look after it, the way you always have
2.	Send it to a blood bank (if suitable)
3.	Send it to a retirement home for someone else to look after it
4.	Sell it or give it away to someone else to look after it
5.	Put To Sleep

Option 1 is obviously the ideal, but sometimes this isnt possible, whether it is financial problems or time problems or another reason.
Option 2 is only suitable for a very few horses, and obviously only a limited amount of places available.
Option 3 is good if you are sure you can afford the livery costs on-going and that you know your horse can live out in all weathers.
Option 4 is dodgy  too many crooks out there to be able to guarantee a happy home for your old companion
Option 5  if all other options are not suitable, then this is all that is left.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely!  Although I would say it's really only a choice between 1 and 5 for most 'useless' horses.

I'm not sure that many people do have healthy horses put to sleep because they are an inconvenience.  I certainly have never met someone in real life that has done this.

Making the decision to have a horse PTS (one that hasn't suffered serious illness or injury) for lack of quality of life is very very difficult in practice and I can't believe that someone would put themselves through it for no good reason.

I do believe that when you take on any animal, you should do everything in your power to ensure their quality of life.  If you can no longer do so then I also believe that having the horse put to sleep is a better option than passing the buck.


----------



## booandellie (27 January 2014)

have been following this post since last night and absolutely agree with ellen jay, i think rather than pts alot of people are offloading their "useless" to them horses onto others in the form of loans, companions and free to good homes so freeing up their time and finances to take on a shiney new not broken horse that they can ride. sites like preloved are full of the them. The ones with a concience do put that they are only suitable for light hacking due to reason xyz but not all do and if you are the sort like me to be actually looking for a 15 year old been there done that sort for light hacking and a quiet life you are then dumped with huge vet bills, feed supplements and a lot of time invested in caring for a horse that someone else didn't have the guts to do the right thing by! i know there are a lot of you with golden oldies out there that are in fine form and i think you are super lucky but there are also us who have been used as a dumping ground for a horse that is not rideable


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

Anyone taking a horse on loan only has to ask for the case history to discover if there has been problems.


----------



## booandellie (27 January 2014)

thats true but not everyone is honest! got my mare onlwvtb, only to discover that her little bit stiff in mornings was actually bone spavin in both hocks and also she was almost blind in 1 eye( i had her vetted) when i told owner they said if i didn't want her i would have to find her another home as she would not take her back. I could not do that to the poor mare as she was lovely and i couldn't guarantee a good home for her somewhere else. In this case i really hope the lady was telling the truth that she did not know as i like her and she came across as being genuine but people do it- take buddy's mummy as a good example


----------



## soulfull (27 January 2014)

One important point I would like to make is that is 

If people were less judgemental and it was socially acceptable for someone to pts a fairly healthy but unrideable horse. Then maybe there wouldn't be so many passed around. Also not so much lying to make sure they got a new home


----------



## catkin (27 January 2014)

I don't know what the answer is - PTS has got to remain an option in lots of cases.

To me, many of the individual horses discussed on this thread sound as if they actually do have a value - a good wise old companion is 'priceless beyond rubies' for many people, including my own beloved Supernanny shetland mare. The problem is that not all unwanted horses can actually fulfill this role - they need to be well-socialised, easily handled, be able to thrive in the same management regime as their herd-mate(s), be 'available to work' so to speak for the majority of the time. 

I'm afraid that many of these poorly conformed, unhandled young coloured cob types that seem to be so numerous would not be able to do the companion 'job', at least not in a lot of homes.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

booandellie said:



			thats true but not everyone is honest! got my mare onlwvtb, only to discover that her little bit stiff in mornings was actually bone spavin in both hocks and also she was almost blind in 1 eye( i had her vetted) when i told owner they said if i didn't want her i would have to find her another home as she would not take her back. I could not do that to the poor mare as she was lovely and i couldn't guarantee a good home for her somewhere else. In this case i really hope the lady was telling the truth that she did not know as i like her and she came across as being genuine but people do it- take buddy's mummy as a good example
		
Click to expand...

The woman I got my lad from must have seen me coming. I firmly believe that when I came to try him, he was buted up to the eye balls and slightly sedated. I had my doubts over his hocks, but as she was offering LWVTB, I thought 'what can I lose? If I like him, I would have him vetted. When I went to fetch him he was much more 'on his toes' completely different to the calm boy he was when I tried him, but I thought that he was just sensing he was going somewhere and didn't think much more of it. He went lame behind shortly after I got him home and was also freaking out when saddled. Owner denied all knowledge. I got the vet to him and xrayed his hocks and found a bone chip in the joint that needed an op. When I told the owner she just said that if I sent him back she would have him shot! I am a big softie and decided to give him a chance and she signed him over to me. I paid for him to be operated on. He came sound eventually but the saddling problem remained. He was subsequently found to have KS....blar blar blar. Anyway, the point is, I think she knew quite well he had serious issues and that LWVTB was the easiest way of off loading him to some mug (me). He's had 4 years with me, most of which have been retired and I have grown very fond of him. He's a real sweetie. But sadly his issues have caught up with him.


----------



## booandellie (27 January 2014)

these poor coloureds usually end up in the hands of young kids who hammer the poor souls up and down the streets till they look like they will colapse_ it is rife where i am and makes you feel sick. It makes me feel even more sick when poeople who have them then put them in foal but this is another topic altogether!


----------



## khalswitz (27 January 2014)

catkin said:



			I don't know what the answer is - PTS has got to remain an option in lots of cases.

To me, many of the individual horses discussed on this thread sound as if they actually do have a value - a good wise old companion is 'priceless beyond rubies' for many people, including my own beloved Supernanny shetland mare. The problem is that not all unwanted horses can actually fulfill this role - they need to be well-socialised, easily handled, be able to thrive in the same management regime as their herd-mate(s), be 'available to work' so to speak for the majority of the time. 

I'm afraid that many of these poorly conformed, unhandled young coloured cob types that seem to be so numerous would not be able to do the companion 'job', at least not in a lot of homes.
		
Click to expand...

Very much agree. A horse that needs lots of extra hard feed to keep weight on in winter when out of work, one that can't be left alone when companion is being ridden, on that is difficult to handle or a bully or a rug ripper for example won't make a good companion - these kind sod things are often not a problem to manage when a horse is in useful work, but as a companion they become as issue. So passing one off as a good companion when not is almost as bad as selling a lame horse as sound, really...


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

Kallibear said:



			Be careful what you joke about!  Someone recently said, in all seriousness,  that they'd rather turn their elderly horse free in the forest rather than have it 'unnecessarily' PTS!!
		
Click to expand...

I can't go in to detail, but I did consider putting my horse [healthy] in a field, and cancel the gun.
He was not elderly and not unhealthy.


----------



## Annagain (27 January 2014)

There's a big difference between putting a horse down for the owner's convenience and in making that decision because there is no other option or because it's the best ting for him.

My boy is 18 and a happy hack because he's not allowed to jump becasue of foot issues. He can do a dressage test but he doesn't want to! He's also riddled with melanomas which aren't causing problems at the moment, but will one day. He has a home with me for life. I bought a 9 year old to event and do riding club stuff on and within 3 years I had a horse who couldn't do that and a few years after that he developed other issues which make him impossible to sell (not that I would anyway) even as a happy hacker. He is easily the sort of horse who might have been PTS by another owner on two counts but I could never do that. 

I'm lucky I'm in a position where I have a decent job and income and can afford to keep him and with a bit of lateral thinking I still get to do what I want. I have a sharer for him and share a friend's horse who I compete on. If I couldn't though I'd just hack and persevere with the dressage and if he had to retire so be it. As long as he's happy and sound, he stays. 

HOWEVER if there was any reason I couldn't guarantee he would be looked after and cared for (I do have a backup plan in my will so hopefully it would never come to it) either through illness or financial problems I would have him PTS. This would be for his benefit and not my convenience. I owe him too much to let him go to an uncertain future where someone would try to make a quick buck out of him and let him suffer as a result. His melanomas are now very obvious so realistically this would be by selling him for meat as nobody in their right minds would buy him, even without a vetting so the outcome would be the same.


----------



## hopo (27 January 2014)

People should stop breeding. Like the moorland ponies that go for meat for pennies. Farmer cant be making much for the work he puts in so why keep breeding them? When they round up all the horses on the moor each year, leave the stallion/s in and dont breed for a while. Problem solved! Never understood why they dont do this


----------



## hnmisty (27 January 2014)

MrsD123 said:



			Anyone taking a horse on loan only has to ask for the case history to discover if there has been problems.
		
Click to expand...

Because nobody in the horse world ever lies!


----------



## Goldenstar (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Can I ask why that is, GS? Someone else said that to me the other week but could not give me a reason why. For me it would depend on the horse. My late mare, I wouldn't have sent because she had management issues (laminitis) that would prevent her from being a suitable candidate, as well as not settling well in new surroundings, but also because I couldn't bear to part with her and I was her best hope of some sort of quality of life. My gelding is different. He is far more independent and socially competent. But most of all because I truly believe that the BB would give him the best possible chance of a comfortable and happy life. My only problem I have with it is that I will find it hard to part with him and I will really miss him. He's made things so much easier for me here with managing the other horses, I don't know what I will do without him. But at the moment he is on 2 bute a day (since being on none while out 24/7) and is still quite stiff and not himself. So after talking things through with my vet and having a long chat with the BB I have decided to give it a go. But if there is anything I don't like the look of when I take him, he will be coming back home with me, and I will keep him out 24/7 until I am once more forced to close the fields then he will be PTS.
		
Click to expand...

To be honest I could not bear to think of my horse was managed like that it is a huge drop in living standards 
A friends horse went and all your doing is delaying the PTS a bit and not having to cope with seeing it done or paying for it I felt it was a bit like dumping the horse giving yourself a warm feeling I would rather have PTS the horse myself at home,  it was a TB not used to be out and unrugged .
I was not convinced the quality of life was what I would want for my own .
I keep my out of work horses exactly the same way they lived when they had a job except they won't be clipped and have minimal rugging if they can no longer do any work .


----------



## undergroundoli (27 January 2014)

soulfull said:



			One important point I would like to make is that is 

If people were less judgemental and it was socially acceptable for someone to pts a fairly healthy but unrideable horse. Then maybe there wouldn't be so many passed around. Also not so much lying to make sure they got a new home
		
Click to expand...

I think it would also make people more willing to take on older horses. Like you I'd want to give a horse I'd known and loved a retirement, but would feel completely differently about retiring a newish horse. With an older horse you might have a decade to build up a partnership before retirement, but the odds that you are going to have to retire it soonish are much higher than with a younger one. 

You can save yourself the PTS v retire dilemma by getting a younger horse. It seems a shame if you are just looking for a happy hacker and pushes you into the coloured cob market


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			To be honest I could not bear to think of my horse was managed like that it is a huge drop in living standards 
A friends horse went and all your doing is delaying the PTS a bit and not having to cope with seeing it done or paying for it I felt it was a bit like dumping the horse giving yourself a warm feeling I would rather have PTS the horse myself at home,  it was a TB not used to be out and unrugged .
I was not convinced the quality of life was what I would want for my own .
I keep my out of work horses exactly the same way they lived when they had a job except they won't be clipped and have minimal rugging if they can no longer do any work .
		
Click to expand...

I completely see where you are coming from here and I have agonised over it for a long time, trying to work out whether my boy would prefer to be dead than being out without a rug during the warmer months. He too is a TB but has been roughed off a lot in the past 3 years. He grows an exceptionally thick winter coat so I have absolutely zero worries about him when he is in the barns for the winter as he stands in without a rug all day now. The only reason I rug him is because he is out at night. He was actually fine all last winter, coming in at night and going out for just 3 hours a day. He used to bounce out of his stable and canter sideways all the way to the turnout area, then go mad bouncing and rearing once out. But this winter he just plodded out of his stable and would just stand all tucked up in the turnout. I thought it was curtains and got the vet to see him. Quite prepared to put him to sleep. But she persuaded me to try him out 24/7 so I did and the change in him was almost instantaneous. He came off the bute and was his normal playful self again. He coped really well out even though it was winter. But my land became badly poached once the really wet weather set in and I had to bring him for some of the time. Even just being in for 7 hours a day, it has affected him badly. He needs to be able to move about. So really, my only concern about the BB is if the summer weather gets cold and wet. Though they do have field shelters and he does use them. 

So I have to ask myself, if I were a horse, would I prefer a little bit of 'roughing it' (some would argue that is what horses are supposed to do), but with most of the time being in a nice social group, never lonely, and handled with kindness, or would I rather be dead? In an ideal world, he would stay here and continue to be treated like any of the riding horses, but his body cannot cope with that. 

I won't get a 'warm feeling' when I leave him at the blood bank. I will be filled with regret at not being able to keep him myself. I will have some doubts, but not so many doubts as I would if I didn't give him the chance to make a go of it there. I have spoken to them long enough to banish many of the concerns I had at first. He is a very sociable horse. He is no trouble to handle. I think he is the absolute ideal candidate for that type of life. But not all horses are, and I wouldn't be sending him if I did not truly believe that it would be the best possible solution for him.

If I am honest, PTS would be easier in a practical sense, but I think he deserves a chance at life.


----------



## brucethegypsycob (27 January 2014)

LD&S said:



			I'm not the right person to answer this really as my three much loved horses will be pts when I can no longer care  for them, they have little or no value in the big wide world but even if they did I would't sell. The charities are full and cannot even now take in the hundreds of horses that need a home, companions are ten a penny. 
I will not risk them being shoved from pillar to post and potentially end up being neglected.
		
Click to expand...

I too, agree and will do exactly the same.


----------



## Exploding Chestnuts (27 January 2014)

hnmisty said:



			Because nobody in the horse world ever lies!
		
Click to expand...

Case History is a veterinary printout,


----------



## Goldenstar (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I completely see where you are coming from here and I have agonised over it for a long time, trying to work out whether my boy would prefer to be dead than being out without a rug during the warmer months. He too is a TB but has been roughed off a lot in the past 3 years. He grows an exceptionally thick winter coat so I have absolutely zero worries about him when he is in the barns for the winter as he stands in without a rug all day now. The only reason I rug him is because he is out at night. He was actually fine all last winter, coming in at night and going out for just 3 hours a day. He used to bounce out of his stable and canter sideways all the way to the turnout area, then go mad bouncing and rearing once out. But this winter he just plodded out of his stable and would just stand all tucked up in the turnout. I thought it was curtains and got the vet to see him. Quite prepared to put him to sleep. But she persuaded me to try him out 24/7 so I did and the change in him was almost instantaneous. He came off the bute and was his normal playful self again. He coped really well out even though it was winter. But my land became badly poached once the really wet weather set in and I had to bring him for some of the time. Even just being in for 7 hours a day, it has affected him badly. He needs to be able to move about. So really, my only concern about the BB is if the summer weather gets cold and wet. Though they do have field shelters and he does use them. 

So I have to ask myself, if I were a horse, would I prefer a little bit of 'roughing it' (some would argue that is what horses are supposed to do), but with most of the time being in a nice social group, never lonely, and handled with kindness, or would I rather be dead? In an ideal world, he would stay here and continue to be treated like any of the riding horses, but his body cannot cope with that. 

I won't get a 'warm feeling' when I leave him at the blood bank. I will be filled with regret at not being able to keep him myself. I will have some doubts, but not so many doubts as I would if I didn't give him the chance to make a go of it there. I have spoken to them long enough to banish many of the concerns I had at first. He is a very sociable horse. He is no trouble to handle. I think he is the absolute ideal candidate for that type of life. But not all horses are, and I wouldn't be sending him if I did not truly believe that it would be the best possible solution for him.

If I am honest, PTS would be easier in a practical sense, but I think he deserves a chance at life.
		
Click to expand...


I would keep my horse at home in such a situation with medication if necessary.
I am making no judgement either way I just am saying I would not do it to one of mine .


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			I would keep my horse at home in such a situation with medication if necessary.
I am making no judgement either way I just am saying I would not do it to one of mine .
		
Click to expand...

As I have been trying to explain, the whole reason he is going to the BB is because he is NOT okay on medication. He has to be out 24/7 and I cannot give him that in the winter. So if he were yours and you would not send him there you would have to PTS. With him it is not a choice between retire at home or send to the BB, it is a choice between send to the BB or PTS. I have kept every single one of my horses for life and so it is painful to me that I am unable to do this for him even though I want to.


----------



## Goldenstar (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			As I have been trying to explain, the whole reason he is going to the BB is because he is NOT okay on medication. He has to be out 24/7 and I cannot give him that in the winter. So if he were yours and you would not send him there you would have to PTS. With him it is not a choice between retire at home or send to the BB, it is a choice between send to the BB or PTS. I have kept every single one of my horses for life and so it is painful to me that I am unable to do this for him even though I want to.
		
Click to expand...

If I can't keep my horses comfy with medication yes I would PTS at home I would never let one be away from me .


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			If I can't keep my horses comfy with medication yes I would PTS at home I would never let one be away from me .
		
Click to expand...

Me too.  Or I'd find a more suitable yard for the horse to live out 24/7.


----------



## Copperpot (27 January 2014)

baran said:



			Well, lucky old you! A friend thought like that until she split from her husband, lost her job (financial sector) then became disabled. Horse was an unsellable waste of space. In the end a group of us clubbed together to have it put down.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry the fact I've got a secure job offends you so much! I can hardly help that. I trained hard for a long time for it. My circumstances are what they are. And I appreciate my job and that the money I earn enables me to keep my horses. If my OH lost his job it would not impact on my horses. No need to be so bitter about my life!


----------



## LaMooch (27 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			If I can't keep my horses comfy with medication yes I would PTS at home I would never let one be away from me .
		
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this statement too


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

I think the blood bank is a lovely life for the right type of horse. I have spoken to two people who have sent their horse there. One lives only 15 minutes away and for several years has been able to see her horse peacefully grazing in the fields there on the times when he has been close enough to see from the road. The horses live a very natural life there in big herds. But it obviously does not suit every type of equine. 

I have never before been in a situation with a horse that I have not been able to retire at home myself and so have never had to consider it before. It wouldn't have suited my other horses for many different reasons, but it does suit my current boy. I have no doubt that he will settle really well into the lifestyle there. I know no one will try to ride him and he will not be passed on. The fact that most of the horses are well into their twenties there, I think speaks volumes for the care they receive.


----------



## HazyXmas (27 January 2014)

I'm sorry to dis-allusion you Wagtail but the BB is not all that great for a lot of horses. I live quite close to the Buckinghamshire one & have a  friend that has worked there for many years. The horses aren't out at all for six months of the year, they live in big barns from October through till April. Nothing is medicated & the friendly 'knackerman' (for want of a better word) is a very regular visitor to collect horses with broken legs from kicks & also broken necks from the way they are fed in the fields.

Sorry to be blunt but i'm sick of reading on here what a wonderful life this place is for a horse. It's mostly just for owner's to not have to make that final decision & feel better about themselves.

I'm sure some horses do have long & happy lives there but not all of them do.

Good luck with yours, i hope he's one of the lucky ones.


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

I also know people who worked at the BB and the stories I've heard are the same as HazyXmas relays.  It's not a life I'd choose for any of mine and definitely not one who is older and has past injuries I'm afraid.  Are you selling your horse to the BB Wagtail or loaning him to them?  You know that if you sell then you give up all rights to them?


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

HazyXmas said:



			I'm sorry to dis-allusion you Wagtail but the BB is not all that great for a lot of horses. I live quite close to the Buckinghamshire one & have a  friend that has worked there for many years. The horses aren't out at all for six months of the year, they live in big barns from October through till April. Nothing is medicated & the friendly 'knackerman' (for want of a better word) is a very regular visitor to collect horses with broken legs from kicks & also broken necks from the way they are fed in the fields.

Sorry to be blunt but i'm sick of reading on here what a wonderful life this place is for a horse. It's mostly just for owner's to not have to make that final decision & feel better about themselves.

I'm sure some horses do have long & happy lives there but not all of them do.

Good luck with yours, i hope he's one of the lucky ones.
		
Click to expand...

I did know they were kept in barns for six months of the year. That would suit my boy better than his current stable for 7 hours of the day and turnout in the sand the rest of the time as he would be able to move about all the time. 

Regarding the broken legs and necks, there are hundreds of horses and so I would expect many injuries. In the past ten years I have had two out of four horses I have owned break their legs in the field. I have been on a livery yard with 30 horses where two horses broke their necks in the same year. 

At my yard my mare (one of seven) horses broke her shoulder in the field. 

It does sound horrendous the way you put it, but with the law of averages, just because of the numbers we are talking about, I would expect a high number of casualties. I think you need to see it in perspective.

Regarding not wanting to make the final decision - I have no problem with that. I had to make it for my horse of a lifetime very recently. Believe me, that was much harder than it would be for any other horse. 

I know my gelding and I know the type of life at the BB would suit him. As I have said, it would not suit every horse. 

So is life at the BB really worse than death?


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			So is life at the BB really worse than death?
		
Click to expand...

That's your choice to make for your horse.  I wouldn't make the same decision as you for my guys.


----------



## be positive (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I did know they were kept in barns for six months of the year. That would suit my boy better than his current stable for 7 hours of the day and turnout in the sand the rest of the time as he would be able to move about all the time. 

Regarding the broken legs and necks, there are hundreds of horses and so I would expect many injuries. In the past ten years I have had two out of four horses I have owned break their legs in the field. I have been on a livery yard with 30 horses where two horses broke their necks in the same year. 

At my yard my mare (one of seven) horses broke her shoulder in the field. 

It does sound horrendous the way you put it, but with the law of averages, just because of the numbers we are talking about, I would expect a high number of casualties. I think you need to see it in perspective.

Regarding not wanting to make the final decision - I have no problem with that. I had to make it for my horse of a lifetime very recently. Believe me, that was much harder than it would be for any other horse. 

I know my gelding and I know the type of life at the BB would suit him. As I have said, it would not suit every horse. 

So is life at the BB really worse than death?
		
Click to expand...

It is something that I know little about other than reading on here, the horses are there to serve a necessary purpose, do a job, they are obviously looked after but must by the very nature of the purpose they are there for and the numbers involved, get little attention, be more like a dairy herd, better than death? yes but if dead they have no thoughts, needs and can suffer no further, it is a difficult one but if you are happy with your decision and think the horse will settle well let him go and try and move on.


----------



## Polos Mum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			So is life at the BB really worse than death?
		
Click to expand...


As you've said very much depends on the individual horse, personally I think mine would struggle in such a large herd environment and would miss out on friendly daily human contact for a scratch.  
I don't know physically how they bleed them but horses at Uni that were bled for research blood got pretty fed up of having it done pretty quickly and really started playing up. 
I can't see the point of delaying the inevitable for mine personally.


----------



## HazyXmas (27 January 2014)

Wagtail you know your horse & you are absolutely right that it does suit some horses down to the ground.

 I've only known of one local horse go there (very tellingly my friend didn't send her horse & she'd have seen him 5 days a week!) He was a very hardy, tough gelding & a complete thug. He loves it there & is having a fab time 

You have to do what's right for you & your horse. Although i would never send one of mine there, i am obviously very pleased that a lot of people do choose to as they do fantastic work. Good luck with your horse.


----------



## Flame_ (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			So is life at the BB really worse than death?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think so, unless a horse isn't really comfortable or is completely unable to socialise with other horses. I sent a mare who was an eight year old very volatile ride and unsaleable after being diagnosed with severe soft tissue injuries in her front feet. She looked perfectly sound to tear about the field, the blood bank guarantee not to sell the horses on and I was and am happy that if, for whatever reason it didn't work out, she'd be destroyed, which is what I was going to do anyway. I'm not sure what the world's coming to when we start saying living in herds without TLC, etc is no life for horses, its as close to how they would live naturally as it can get!

Wagtail, don't take this the wrong way, but you seem quite sentimental about your horses, would you be OK with the blood bank just taking the decision to have your old horse destroyed for whatever reason because I can't imagine they'll think about it as hard or as long as you do, although I may of course be wrong about that?


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

I am the type of person who easily feels guilt. Believe me, I have thought this over and investigated the whole thing for over a year. Obviously, my preferred thing would have been to keep him here myself, and I was elated when I thought I had cracked it. I have never had a horse that could not cope with even minimal stabling before.

I am 100% comfortable that I have made the right decision for him. Knowing him like I do, I could not imagine a horse it would suit more than him, and I would be consumed with guilt if I had him PTS knowing that he could have had a chance at the blood bank.


----------



## Pigeon (27 January 2014)

Oh, give them to charities or good companion homes 4 lyf, of course 

I'll admit I did keep a retired horse for four years, which meant no riding etc, but there was definitely a deadline there, and I'm not entirely sure I would do it again - he did get bored, despite my best efforts at hand walking etc. Perhaps it would be different if he'd been elderly, but he wasn't. We have one retiree at the moment, and we're thinking this summer will be his last, because although he's not lame as such (only when ridden, it's arthritis) he doesn't look comfortable when it's cold, despite a large daily dose of bute. To be honest, horses are the only exercise I get, and riding is the one thing I truly love. If I'm going to pay horrific livery bills I'd like to be able to ride!


----------



## Polos Mum (27 January 2014)

Flame_ said:



			I'm not sure what the world's coming to when we start saying living in herds without TLC, etc is no life for horses, its as close to how they would live naturally as it can get!
		
Click to expand...

My horse has never lived like this and selective breding has taken away lots of features of a natural shapped/ sized horse - so it would be a massive change for him and I'm not sure he personally would get on with such a change.  
A youngster, native type, who's not conditioned to a different lifestyle - I totally agree a natural lifestyle would be great.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Flame_ said:



			Wagtail, don't take this the wrong way, but you seem quite sentimental about your horses, would you be OK with the blood bank just taking the decision to have your old horse destroyed for whatever reason because I can't imagine they'll think about it as hard or as long as you do, although I may of course be wrong about that?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, because I don't have a choice. It is either PTS here or at least have a chance of a long life at the BB. It may be that he seizes up in any case as his disease progresses. In which case I would also have him PTS. At the moment he is on two bute a day. It keeps him comfortable enough that he is not really suffering enough to be PTS immediately. In the Spring, before he goes, I plan to take him off the bute and turn him back out 24/7, just to double check that he will go back to his lively self without bute. If he doesn't then the BB will be cancelled. He will be buted up again for the summer and then PTS at home before the winter.


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Flame_ said:



			I'm not sure what the world's coming to when we start saying living in herds without TLC, etc is no life for horses, its as close to how they would live naturally as it can get!
		
Click to expand...

Oh no it's not that for me.  My own horses live out 24/7 in managed herds and many are not pandered to, however I don't keep herds of 60 or 70 horses all in together in winter barns with tiny turnouts for months every year.  I don't like my herds being larger than 6 horses lol!


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			So is life at the BB really worse than death?
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn't make a choice like this for one of my horses, think it is a chickens way out


----------



## Arizahn (27 January 2014)

There is no such thing as a useless, valueless horse. Being able to work is a bonus for us. They owe us nothing. If all a horse can do is be a horse, it is still utterly perfect.

That said, if they are unable to live properly and happily as horses due to illness or injury, are dangerous to themselves and/or others, or if we cannot care for them properly and cannot rehome them to someone who can and will care for them properly, then we owe them a good death. 

The same holds true for any living creature. There is no magic wand that gives us an alternative: duty of care ultimately means duty of death. It is part and parcel of responsible ownership. And I say that as someone who has been present at numerous births, deaths and interim attempts to preserve life. 

Death is inevitable. It is not something that should be feared. It is something that must be well met and managed correctly by those involved.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

I think you have the perfect set up SF. I always admire your philosophy on horses. I am very tempted to move to Canada!

Over here I have been on two very large livery yards that had just two herds. A mares herd and a geldings herd. The largest one was over 50 strong.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			I wouldn't make a choice like this for one of my horses, think it is a chickens way out
		
Click to expand...

Well I better go shoot him then. I mean everyone who does that is brave right?


----------



## Arizahn (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Yes, because I don't have a choice. It is either PTS here or at least have a chance of a long life at the BB. It may be that he seizes up in any case as his disease progresses. In which case I would also have him PTS. At the moment he is on two bute a day. It keeps him comfortable enough that he is not really suffering enough to be PTS immediately. In the Spring, before he goes, I plan to take him off the bute and turn him back out 24/7, just to double check that he will go back to his lively self without bute. If he doesn't then the BB will be cancelled. He will be buted up again for the summer and then PTS at home before the winter.
		
Click to expand...


I consider this to be perfectly reasonable and wish him all the best.


----------



## touchstone (27 January 2014)

Arizahn said:



			There is no such thing as a useless, valueless horse. Being able to work is a bonus for us. They owe us nothing. If all a horse can do is be a horse, it is still utterly perfect.

That said, if they are unable to live properly and happily as horses due to illness or injury, are dangerous to themselves and/or others, or if we cannot care for them properly and cannot rehome them to someone who can and will care for them properly, then we owe them a good death. 
The same holds true for any living creature. There is no magic wand that gives us an alternative: duty of care ultimately means duty of death. It is part and parcel of responsible ownership. And I say that as someone who has been present at numerous births, deaths and interim attempts to preserve life. 

Death is inevitable. It is not something that should be feared. It is something that must be well met and managed correctly by those involved.
		
Click to expand...

^^^  Great post Arizahn, sums up my thinking on the matter perfectly


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I think you have the perfect set up SF. I always admire your philosophy on horses. I am very tempted to move to Canada!
		
Click to expand...

It's funny because when I lived in Hants/Berks the way I keep horses now was not the way I kept them there.  And I honestly couldn't have ever imagined that I would keep horses the way I do here, but having done it both ways, I know there's no way I could ever go back to my 'British way'.




			Over here I have been on two very large livery yards that had just two herds. A mares herd and a geldings herd. The largest one was over 50 strong.
		
Click to expand...

Ooh no I couldn't lol.  Even when I had my yard in England I was still really cautious about having loads of horses together so that's one thing I've not changed.  Most of my herds in England only had 4 or 5 horses in them too, and always on larger acreages than is often the case at many UK yards.


----------



## HazyXmas (27 January 2014)

Arizahn said:



			I consider this to be perfectly reasonable and wish him all the best.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with Arizahn, you've thought it through & understand the risks & are making the best decision for you & him. At the end of the day that's what matter's, not what anyone on a forum thinks. Say goodbye to him in April if you are happy that he is still up to it & then move on. Good luck x


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Well I better go shoot him then. I mean everyone who does that is brave right?
		
Click to expand...


You think it is fair for a horse to be shut 6  months of the year in a barn?


Sometimes you have to be brave to PTS a horse


----------



## Carefreegirl (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Actually, it's not passing the buck. I will be sending my gelding there this year. He WAS down to go last year but I pulled out having rethought my management plan of his condition. Basically he has to be out 24/7 or he completely seizes up and is in a huge amount of pain even with bute. I had taken him on LWVTB 4 years ago (aged 8 at the time) but immediately found lameness in both hocks and severe kissing spine. When I spoke to his owners they said if they took him back they would have him shot. So I spent thousands having him operated on, both his hocks and his back, but although the operations brought him field sound, he was still unrideable. But I decided to retire him as he was a very happy chap and a lovely horse. Then just over a year ago, he stopped being the happy, playful boy I knew and in the winter took a turn for the worst. It was being stabled that was the cause of it and that is why he was put down on the waiting list for the blood bank.

 But when it came to the time he had to go, he was then out 24/7 here and was back to his old self (without bute), so I took him off their list and decided I would try my best to give him 24/7 turn out all year round and retire him here. Unfortunately, the recent wet weather meant I had to close the fields and even though he is going out in the sand for 17 hours a day, even the 7 that he is stabled have seized him up again. The BB have them out 24/7 in the summer and in big free range barns with their established herds in the winter. So I have the choice of PTS at home or send him to the BB. I have chosen the BB. I know he would absolutely relish the life there because I know him well. He is great with vets and needles and excellent to handle.

Also, horses have a useful life at the blood bank. How do you think horses would get blood for transfusions if no horses gave it? How about the serum used for medical research etc? It's hardly passing the buck if it is the best choice for a horse. I would always choose to retire a horse at home ideally, but sometimes, even when someone is willing to do that and has the resources, it is not always possible if the facilities don't suit the horse's condition.
		
Click to expand...

Brilliant post. As the previous one about truth and fact. 
My previous horse was retired to the blood bank 8 years ago due to Navicular and the onset of side bone. He was 10 years old when he was retired.
I'd like to think that his blood donations have helped in saving other horses lives !


----------



## HazyXmas (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			You think it is fair for a horse to be shut 6  months of the year in a barn?

I personally wouldn't want that for one of mine but we're now getting back to the whole 'how different are cattle to horses' argument.

 I don't know anything about cattle but around here they do seem to spend the winter months living together quite happily in barns. Why shouldn't horses?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			You think it is fair for a horse to be shut 6  months of the year in a barn?


Sometimes you have to be brave to PTS a horse
		
Click to expand...

I know my boy and he would be fine with that. It's much better than confined 23 hours a day in a 12 x 12 stable like many horses are. He will have shelter, equine company and room to move around, so in his case, I don't have a problem with it. Obviously, it's not as good as 24/7 turnout in a huge field, but not many people are lucky enough to be able to offer that to horses in this country, especially on clay soil.

And regarding being brave. I have no problems with that, thank you.


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Don't the BB shoot the horse once they reach the age of 15 or have I read it wrong on another forum?


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Carefreegirl said:



			Brilliant post. As the previous one about truth and fact. 
My previous horse was retired to the blood bank 8 years ago due to Navicular and the onset of side bone. He was 10 years old when he was retired.
I'd like to think that his blood donations have helped in saving other horses lives !
		
Click to expand...

Thank you. There is a lot of scaremongering that goes on around the blood banks. I don't know why. I mean would all those people saying how bad they are refuse a blood transfusion if their best horse needed it? After all, it would be supporting these evil places where horses are better off dead!


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			Don't the BB shoot the horse once they reach the age of 15 or have I read it wrong on another forum?
		
Click to expand...

Load of rubbish.

They don't take in horses over the age of 15. But most horses there are actually in their late twenties.


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Load of rubbish.

They don't take in horses over the age of 15. But most horses there are actually in their late twenties.
		
Click to expand...

Oh that's not what I read, if you loan the horse to them they give it back to you when he/she reaches 15, so you are going to sell your boy to them then?


----------



## HazyXmas (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you. There is a lot of scaremongering that goes on around the blood banks. I don't know why. I mean would all those people saying how bad they are refuse a blood transfusion if their best horse needed it? After all, it would be supporting these evil places where horses are better off dead!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely right Wagtail, i'm sorry if it seemed like am totally against the BB, I'm not, they do amazing work.


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I mean would all those people saying how bad they are refuse a blood transfusion if their best horse needed it?
		
Click to expand...

I've owned horses for over 40 years and I've dealt with many accidents and injuries (some horrific!) and I've never ever had a horse have a blood transfusion.  I wonder how many people from here have actually had their horses be given blood transfusions?


----------



## Polos Mum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I mean would all those people saying how bad they are refuse a blood transfusion if their best horse needed it?
		
Click to expand...

I thought they used it to make HRT for women? Or have I completely made that up? I'd be amazed if they needed so much blood for horse to horse transfusions - happy to stand corrected.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			Oh that's not what I read, if you loan the horse to them they give it back to you when he/she reaches 15, so you are going to sell your boy to them then?
		
Click to expand...

You clearly know nothing about them.


----------



## Carefreegirl (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			Oh that's not what I read, if you loan the horse to them they give it back to you when he/she reaches 15, so you are going to sell your boy to them then?
		
Click to expand...

You don't loan them to the blood bank, you sign them over and they then become property of the BB. No money exchanges hands.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Spring Feather said:



			I've owned horses for over 40 years and I've dealt with many accidents and injuries (some horrific!) and I've never ever had a horse have a blood transfusion.  I wonder how many people from here have actually had their horses be given blood transfusions?
		
Click to expand...

My sister did last year. Her horse was kicked in the stomach and had massive internal bleeding. He was found slumped and almost unconscious. Thankfully, after a blood transfusion he has made a complete recovery, but had to be cross tied on a drip for two weeks.


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Carefreegirl said:



			You don't loan them to the blood bank, you sign them over and they them become property of the BB. No money exchanges hands.
		
Click to expand...

Actually that's not true.  You can loan the horse or sell it to BB.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			I thought they used it to make HRT for women? Or have I completely made that up? I'd be amazed if they needed so much blood for horse to horse transfusions - happy to stand corrected.
		
Click to expand...

That is pregnant mare's urine.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Spring Feather said:



			Actually that's not true.  You can loan the horse or sell it to BB.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the one I am dealing with you gift the horse. You don't sell it. In fact you have to pay for two blood tests yourself before they can go there.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Carefreegirl said:



			You don't loan them to the blood bank, you sign them over and they then become property of the BB. No money exchanges hands.
		
Click to expand...

Correct.


----------



## Polos Mum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			That is pregnant mare's urine.
		
Click to expand...

wow - so do they have big farms of perminantly pregnant mare then? or is there a synthetic version  - 1000's of women take HRT?


----------



## blitznbobs (27 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			I thought they used it to make HRT for women? Or have I completely made that up? I'd be amazed if they needed so much blood for horse to horse transfusions - happy to stand corrected.
		
Click to expand...

That's pregnant mate wee wee


----------



## Carefreegirl (27 January 2014)

Spring Feather said:



			Actually that's not true.  You can loan the horse or sell it to BB.
		
Click to expand...


I wasn't given that option but tbh I'd of still signed him over. I drive over in the summer to try and spot him on the fields. Try spotting the grey in a herd of 100..... Every grey looks the same.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

There are so many untruths said about the blood banks. I wonder why that is?


----------



## honetpot (27 January 2014)

In most humane blood donations the blood is split into its different parts, plasma, red blood cells, platlets and things like Factor H, so I would assume it would be the same with horse donations.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			wow - so do they have big farms of perminantly pregnant mare then? or is there a synthetic version  - 1000's of women take HRT?
		
Click to expand...

It's actually rather horrible. There is quite a campaign against it.


----------



## Polos Mum (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			It's actually rather horrible. There is quite a campaign against it.
		
Click to expand...

I bet - sorry for digressing


----------



## Sussexbythesea (27 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			wow - so do they have big farms of perminantly pregnant mare then? or is there a synthetic version  - 1000's of women take HRT?
		
Click to expand...

Yes they do have farms where they breed foals just to extract the hormone from the mares urine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjki305fj2k


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Carefreegirl said:



			I wasn't given that option but tbh I'd of still signed him over. I drive over in the summer to try and spot him on the fields. Try spotting the grey in a herd of 100..... Every grey looks the same.
		
Click to expand...

They're all businesses so I'm sure are run in whichever way best suits that particular business.  Some do give the option of purchase or loan.  I can imagine it would be crazy trying to find *any* individual horse in a herd of 100 lol!


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

Polos Mum said:



			wow - so do they have big farms of perminantly pregnant mare then? or is there a synthetic version  - 1000's of women take HRT?
		
Click to expand...

There's hardly any PMU farms left over here, most of them closed down about 10 years ago.  Yes there is a synthetic version, it's been around for years.


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

I have researched this it on the internet now, and it is common knowledge that the horse at 15 is PTS, they are also PTS if they don't cope with the environment if you don't want it back, even previous threads on here ... Which blood bank are you going for? Maybe its a new one


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			I have researched this it on the internet now, and it is common knowledge that the horse at 15 is PTS, they are also PTS if they don't cope with the environment if you don't want it back, even previous threads on here ... Which blood bank are you going for? Maybe its a new one
		
Click to expand...

Please reference the source of your 'internet research'. Zig zag, you are just spouting rumours. Those of us who have dealt with them first hand rather than just regurgitating a load of old drival from forums know you don't have a clue what you are talking about. That is the problem with forums. You don't know who you are talking to and whether they are a professional horse person with years of experience, or whether the closest they have come to a horse is My Little Pony.


----------



## LaMooch (27 January 2014)

I understand the principles of a blood bank because like us humans horse's need blood transfusion at some point. What I don't understand is some horses are bred just for blood so again its useless horses being uselss.


----------



## Carefreegirl (27 January 2014)

Spring Feather said:



			They're all businesses so I'm sure are run in whichever way best suits that particular business.  Some do give the option of purchase or loan.  I can imagine it would be crazy trying to find *any* individual horse in a herd of 100 lol!
		
Click to expand...

After the third attempt I took a pair of binoculars :biggrin3: 
They were near the road last year and I saw him, called and wolf whistled as that was how I always called him. He looked up, stared for a few moments then turned away as if to say sod off....

For the record zigzag he was 18 at that moment. He'll be 19 this year.


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			I understand the principles of a blood bank because like us humans horse's need blood transfusion at some point. What I don't understand is some horses are bred just for blood so again its useless horses being uselss.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Horses are bred just for blood?


----------



## LaMooch (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Horses are bred just for blood?
		
Click to expand...

yep my friend has a horse that was bred just for blood. Do not know if it happens anymore. Think her horse is now 7/8 years old now so quite a while ago


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Please reference the source of your 'internet research'. Zig zag, you are just spouting rumours. Those of us who have dealt with them first hand rather than just regurgitating a load of old drival from forums know you don't have a clue what you are talking about. That is the problem with forums. You don't know who you are talking to and whether they are a professional horse person with years of experience, or whether the closest they have come to a horse is My Little Pony.
		
Click to expand...

Several threads on here for a start ( and some were at one time highly respected posters) . And I said I don't have first hand experience of them ....


----------



## Regandal (27 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			yep my friend has a horse that was bred just for blood. Do not know if it happens anymore. Think her horse is now 7/8 years old now so quite a while ago
		
Click to expand...

   Did they refer to it as a "blood horse"?  That could have been a reference to it's breeding, possibly not what it was actually to be used for.


----------



## LaMooch (27 January 2014)

Regandal said:



			Did they refer to it as a "blood horse"?  That could have been a reference to it's breeding, possibly not what it was actually to be used for.
		
Click to expand...

what do you mean by blood horse?


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			Several threads on here for a start ( and some were at one time highly respected posters) . And I said I don't have first hand experience of them ....
		
Click to expand...

I know the threads you mean. A year ago I decided to find out for myself, first hand. They are wrong. They don't TAKE any horses in after 15 years old but they are kept for as long as they have a good quality of life. 

It doesn't matter if you believe that or choose to believe the untrue rumours. The important thing is that I know the truth and I am the one sending my horse there. Also Carefree girl has jut said that she saw her horse grazing there when he was 18 years old. That was when he had been there for 8 years. Obviously somehow managed to avoid all the rampant leg breaking and neck breaking that goes on there. :wink3:


----------



## Wagtail (27 January 2014)

Regandal said:



			Did they refer to it as a "blood horse"?  That could have been a reference to it's breeding, possibly not what it was actually to be used for.
		
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking.


----------



## Spring Feather (27 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			what do you mean by blood horse?
		
Click to expand...

A blood horse is a TB.


----------



## Regandal (27 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			what do you mean by blood horse?
		
Click to expand...

  I am interested that you say the horse was bred to be used "for it's blood".  You could use any healthy horse for blood bank type stuff.  It's quite common to hear people talk about "blood horses", which means they have a high % of TB or other "hot" breed of horse in their breeding.


----------



## LaMooch (27 January 2014)

yep he a TB. She said he was bred as a blood horse. I'm sorry if I have made a mistake I'm not knowledgeable in this field but happy and willing to learn so I am happy to be stood corrected


----------



## Goldenstar (27 January 2014)

Wagtail , you must do what you feel is best for your horse as I said .
I however based on my experiance of caring for my older horses will never send any of mine to the BB.
This not based on Internet rumours or googling stuff it's based on the fact the horses do not get pain relief if they need it as they age they are not being checked as carefully as indvidually handled horse would at home .
My horses are mine that to me means they never leave my care until they are PTS ( I say PTS bacause in fifty years of horse ownership I only once found a horse dead ).
I live with chronic pain myself I am very careful not to inflict it on my horses .
Just because someone would not take the same desision as you does not they have made that desision based on faulty imformation .
They have just come to a different conculsion to you that's all.


----------



## zigzag (27 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I know the threads you mean. A year ago I decided to find out for myself, first hand. They are wrong. They don't TAKE any horses in after 15 years old but they are kept for as long as they have a good quality of life. 

It doesn't matter if you believe that or choose to believe the untrue rumours. The important thing is that I know the truth and I am the one sending my horse there. Also Carefree girl has jut said that she saw her horse grazing there when he was 18 years old. That was when he had been there for 8 years. Obviously somehow managed to avoid all the rampant leg breaking and neck breaking that goes on there. :wink3:
		
Click to expand...

I wish you luck


----------



## EstherYoung (28 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			Yes, because I don't have a choice. It is either PTS here or at least have a chance of a long life at the BB. It may be that he seizes up in any case as his disease progresses. In which case I would also have him PTS. At the moment he is on two bute a day. It keeps him comfortable enough that he is not really suffering enough to be PTS immediately. In the Spring, before he goes, I plan to take him off the bute and turn him back out 24/7, just to double check that he will go back to his lively self without bute. If he doesn't then the BB will be cancelled. He will be buted up again for the summer and then PTS at home before the winter.
		
Click to expand...

I think this sounds eminently sensible.

I would just say though, don't get your hopes up. Arthritis is a tricky one to manage, as it isn't consistent and often requires an ad hoc approach to pain relief. My old arthritic horse had a box of Bute on prescription and on his stiffer days he got some and on his better days we cut it back. Weather and ground conditions affected how stiff he was.

Your lad isn't going to have the option of an ad hoc approach to pain relief at the BB, as they will want him clean as a whistle.

Would a retirement home be a better option for him? You'd have to pay, but at least you'd know that if he did have a stiff or sore day they would give him a Bute.


----------



## Wagtail (28 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			Wagtail , you must do what you feel is best for your horse as I said .
I however based on my experiance of caring for my older horses will never send any of mine to the BB.
This not based on Internet rumours or googling stuff it's based on the fact the horses do not get pain relief if they need it as they age they are not being checked as carefully as indvidually handled horse would at home .
My horses are mine that to me means they never leave my care until they are PTS ( I say PTS bacause in fifty years of horse ownership I only once found a horse dead ).
I live with chronic pain myself I am very careful not to inflict it on my horses .
Just because someone would not take the same desision as you does not they have made that desision based on faulty imformation .
They have just come to a different conculsion to you that's all.
		
Click to expand...

I was referring to Zigzag who keeps spouting incorrect information about the blood bank. 

As I say, I completely understand your view and I have never let a horse go from my care in 40 years (other than a couple of loan horses that went back to their owners, and one who went to my sister. But I have never had one like my current boy who I can not keep comfortable even on bute with the facilities I have. But the fact that he comes right so quickly once he is out 24/7 means that he should thrive at the blood bank. However, before sending him in the summer, he will be put out here 24/7 again to ensure he returns to his old self without bute.

I have spoken at length to the blood bank and whilst they do not use bute, they do not leave horses in pain. They are PTS on the premises. When my  lad is in pain, you cannot miss it. It is obvious. So I do not worry that he will be left suffering in pain for a prolonged time.

Having said all this however, I would not be sending him if I could manage his condition here. It has been a very difficult decision to make.


----------



## Flame_ (28 January 2014)

Perhaps a stupid question but, Wagtail, have you thought about sending him to another yard on full care grass livery, then he'd still be yours but could stay out? It sounds like you're happy with your plan anyway though.


----------



## Wagtail (28 January 2014)

EstherYoung said:



			I think this sounds eminently sensible.

I would just say though, don't get your hopes up. Arthritis is a tricky one to manage, as it isn't consistent and often requires an ad hoc approach to pain relief. My old arthritic horse had a box of Bute on prescription and on his stiffer days he got some and on his better days we cut it back. Weather and ground conditions affected how stiff he was.

Your lad isn't going to have the option of an ad hoc approach to pain relief at the BB, as they will want him clean as a whistle.

Would a retirement home be a better option for him? You'd have to pay, but at least you'd know that if he did have a stiff or sore day they would give him a Bute.
		
Click to expand...

I am completely happy with my decision to send him to the BB. I would trust them more than a retirement livery but that is just me. Since running my own yard and hearing so many horror stories about liveries, I would never leave a horse on full livery again. Even though I run a full livery yard and so I know there are some good yards, I just feel more comfortable with the blood bank. But also, I want him to be useful. He is so good with vets.


----------



## el_Snowflakes (28 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			I rather have the 15 yo chesnut mare myself .
		
Click to expand...

Lol yes I would take a 15 y/o chestnut mare over a 3 y/o coloured cob anyday.....a million times over!!!.......


----------



## Centauress (28 January 2014)

zigzag said:



			You think it is fair for a horse to be shut 6  months of the year in a barn?
		
Click to expand...

Or Medicated up to the Eyeballs 24/7??????????


----------



## Goldenstar (28 January 2014)

Centauress said:



			Or Medicated up to the Eyeballs 24/7??????????
		
Click to expand...

I would not hesitate to medicate an old horse to keep it comfy .


----------



## baran (28 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			I'm sorry the fact I've got a secure job offends you so much! I can hardly help that. I trained hard for a long time for it. My circumstances are what they are. And I appreciate my job and that the money I earn enables me to keep my horses. If my OH lost his job it would not impact on my horses. No need to be so bitter about my life!
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't offend me at all. What did offend me was your naive assumption that life was that simple. My friend had trained for yars as well. She didn't plan to split from her husband or become disabled but, faced with that situation, she dealt with it as best she could. And that meant the horse had to go.


----------



## Copperpot (28 January 2014)

I have planned for these situations actually I am not naive. I have a disability scheme which pays out a substantial sum should the need arise. Also my salary is enough to keep me, my horses and my home should I split with my OH. So my life isn't dependant on someone else keeping me. I'm not lucky old me as you stated. I plan for things and try to cover all bases as much as I can. I hardly call that naive.


----------



## Copperpot (28 January 2014)

And I haven't judged anyone who has chosen to have their horse pts. Just expressing my opinion on what I would do. Your friend did what she could in her situation.


----------



## baran (28 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			I have planned for these situations actually I am not naive. I have a disability scheme which pays out a substantial sum should the need arise. Also my salary is enough to keep me, my horses and my home should I split with my OH. So my life isn't dependant on someone else keeping me. I'm not lucky old me as you stated. I plan for things and try to cover all bases as much as I can. I hardly call that naive.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know of any disability scheme which would pay enough to keep you and a horse on full livery for 10+ years, which is how long the horse could have lived.
I was trying to make the point that you cannot say that you will never sell/PTS for financial reasons until the situation hits you. There were no heroic sacrifices she could make to keep the horse.


----------



## Equi (28 January 2014)

Hah, had a funny read the other night with this issue. I wasn't involved, but someone kept saying "I have a solution and i'm currently writing it out with lawyers to make sure noone steals it it will be protected by me, i can save every horse, you are all just murderers"

Was rather amusing. 

Sorry, a little off topic. I have nothing to add to this thread other than that lol


----------



## siennamum (28 January 2014)

I think  (this is just my perspective)there are lots of 'useless valueless' horses about. Obviously overbreeding is a huge problem, but there is also a problem people who see PTS as a bad thing. It is obviously not a good thing, but since all our pets will die, we at least can make a choice about when & how. There is such a furore 'these days' about having a horse PTS, that people do anything to avoid it, it just swells the numbers of 'useless, valueless' horses.

I don't like to see my pets suffer and so always PTS at the start of their downward slide rather than when life has become intolerable. The only regrets I have about animals I have PTS has been when I put them through unnecessary treatments and made them suffer, I have no regrets for animals who were PTS while still feeling OK and relatively well, just a bit of sadness because I miss them.

I might sell a horse which is fantastic & healthy and a good performer. But would never pass on one who was in poor health or aged, or who had behavioural issues. I do have sharers & loaners, which allows other people to love & benefit from my lovely horses, but allows me to control their wellbeing.


----------



## Tiddlypom (28 January 2014)

Copperpot said:



			I'm sorry the fact I've got a secure job offends you so much! I can hardly help that. I trained hard for a long time for it!
		
Click to expand...

I'm impressed that you are confident that you have a secure job, they are rarer than hen's teeth these days. I know of many people who have also trained long and hard for what they hoped would be a job for life, only to find that the reality of the modern career structure is very different.


----------



## Archangel (28 January 2014)

baran said:



			I don't know of any disability scheme which would pay enough to keep you and a horse on full livery for 10+ years
		
Click to expand...

We have a scheme at work, in the case of permanent incapacity my salary is paid at the current level (with yearly inflation rises) until retirement.   Most people just go 'yeah' when I tell them about it, not realising that it is such a good benefit.  Not everybody has a job like this though (believe me I get a lot of grief) and we never know what is round the corner do we...


----------



## Copperpot (28 January 2014)

I have the same kind of incapacity scheme at work - 85% of my current salary or an agreed final pay off figure and I leave but keep my pension. Plus a private one thru work also which I pay monthly into. 

My job has a shortage and my company need us to do overtime to fulfil what they require. There has been no redundancies since the 1980's in my sector. My company are actively recruiting all the time so yes I feel confident that as long as I don't mess up big time my job is as secure as it could be.

I believe 600 + people applied for 10 positions last time they recruited. 10 is the largest group they will train at once. Out of those 10 perhaps 6 will pass and become employed. Out of those 6 some will not make it through 2 year probation etc etc. 

No job is 100% secure I realise this but I don't think it's a bad thing to feel that your job is secure and to plan your life accordingly.


----------



## littleshetland (28 January 2014)

Well I don't really have anything to add to this debate - all points of view seem to have been covered but it all reminds me of a true story I heard (slightly off subject)   During WW1 horse were being rounded up from all over England and being shipped to France for the war effort.  All types, draught horses through to blood riding horses - the owners of these poor creatures had no say in the matter, off they went. I'm sure most us are aware of what fate had in store.  The subject of this story, a wealthy gentleman with a large estate and a yard of beautiful  hunters, riding horses and brood mares (he was too old to be enlisted himself) took the gun and despatched his beloved animals -  he couldn't bear the thought of what lay ahead for them.... I wonder, how would people on this MB describe him?


----------



## blitznbobs (28 January 2014)

baran said:



			I don't know of any disability scheme which would pay enough to keep you and a horse on full livery for 10+ years, which is how long the horse could have lived.
I was trying to make the point that you cannot say that you will never sell/PTS for financial reasons until the situation hits you. There were no heroic sacrifices she could make to keep the horse.
		
Click to expand...

It's called income protection and critical illness cover - I have both of these and I could afford to keep my horses at full livery if I became seriously ill or disabled. You can insure against anything...


----------



## Equi (28 January 2014)

littleshetland said:



			Well I don't really have anything to add to this debate - all points of view seem to have been covered but it all reminds me of a true story I heard (slightly off subject)   During WW1 horse were being rounded up from all over England and being shipped to France for the war effort.  All types, draught horses through to blood riding horses - the owners of these poor creatures had no say in the matter, off they went. I'm sure most us are aware of what fate had in store.  The subject of this story, a wealthy gentleman with a large estate and a yard of beautiful  hunters, riding horses and brood mares (he was too old to be enlisted himself) took the gun and despatched his beloved animals -  he couldn't bear the thought of what lay ahead for them.... I wonder, how would people on this MB describe him?
		
Click to expand...

:'( breaks my heart what war horses went through.


----------



## Wagtail (28 January 2014)

littleshetland said:



			Well I don't really have anything to add to this debate - all points of view seem to have been covered but it all reminds me of a true story I heard (slightly off subject)   During WW1 horse were being rounded up from all over England and being shipped to France for the war effort.  All types, draught horses through to blood riding horses - the owners of these poor creatures had no say in the matter, off they went. I'm sure most us are aware of what fate had in store.  The subject of this story, a wealthy gentleman with a large estate and a yard of beautiful  hunters, riding horses and brood mares (he was too old to be enlisted himself) took the gun and despatched his beloved animals -  he couldn't bear the thought of what lay ahead for them.... I wonder, how would people on this MB describe him?
		
Click to expand...

I would like to think I had the guts to do the same thing myself.


----------



## littleshetland (28 January 2014)

Yes, ditto  -  I think that the logic behind his actions was that he felt he had given them the best life possible, as they had given their best to him - he owed it to them to give them the best possible ending.


----------



## Cortez (28 January 2014)

littleshetland said:



			Well I don't really have anything to add to this debate - all points of view seem to have been covered but it all reminds me of a true story I heard (slightly off subject)   During WW1 horse were being rounded up from all over England and being shipped to France for the war effort.  All types, draught horses through to blood riding horses - the owners of these poor creatures had no say in the matter, off they went. I'm sure most us are aware of what fate had in store.  The subject of this story, a wealthy gentleman with a large estate and a yard of beautiful  hunters, riding horses and brood mares (he was too old to be enlisted himself) took the gun and despatched his beloved animals -  he couldn't bear the thought of what lay ahead for them.... I wonder, how would people on this MB describe him?
		
Click to expand...

I would describe him as a very realistic and responsible owner. No living animal should have had to endure what those horses and mules had to go through.


----------



## thatsmygirl (28 January 2014)

I'm not the right person to answer this either, I have a old half blind useless pain in the arse lad who just costs me loads but he's loved and treated the same as the others and will not be pts until his time comes, but that's my horse, my money, my choice. I would never pass him on he would be pts if that ever became an option.

Iv got no issue with having horses pts if need be. There's a lady near me "saving" coloured cob foals from the meat man at the market, chucking them in a field not handling or doing anything with them and trying to sell for £50 each. Why??


----------



## Centauress (28 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			I would not hesitate to medicate an old horse to keep it comfy .
		
Click to expand...

Is That REALLY Fair to The Horse or is it Just to Make Us Humans Feel Better???????


----------



## Goldenstar (28 January 2014)

Centauress said:



			Is That REALLY Fair to The Horse or is it Just to Make Us Humans Feel Better???????
		
Click to expand...

I would never keep a lame horse in retirement unless it was comfortable if I can't keep them comfy I PTS at home.
There's no excuse for not medicating old horses if they are lame , non whatsoever ever .
Medicating the horse does not make me feel better it makes the horse feel better .


----------



## hnmisty (28 January 2014)

littleshetland said:



			Well I don't really have anything to add to this debate - all points of view seem to have been covered but it all reminds me of a true story I heard (slightly off subject)   During WW1 horse were being rounded up from all over England and being shipped to France for the war effort.  All types, draught horses through to blood riding horses - the owners of these poor creatures had no say in the matter, off they went. I'm sure most us are aware of what fate had in store.  The subject of this story, a wealthy gentleman with a large estate and a yard of beautiful  hunters, riding horses and brood mares (he was too old to be enlisted himself) took the gun and despatched his beloved animals -  he couldn't bear the thought of what lay ahead for them.... I wonder, how would people on this MB describe him?
		
Click to expand...

It was the same with the army horses in Egypt at the end of the war. Lots of the officers took their horses out into the desert and shot them, rather than leave them to the fate they knew was waiting. 

Fast forward a few years and it was those pathetic survivors who once valiant, brave and strong war horses who had been reduced to starving, defeated cripples that led to Dorothy Brooke founding the Brooke Animal Hospital.

No one would tell her at first of any surviving British army horses, but she knew they must exist. In fact, the very first one she bought, she bought just to have it shot because it was that pathetic and had completely given up on the life it was being forced to continue with.


----------



## ester (28 January 2014)

I have always thought that most of the blood from the commercial blood banks becomes products not used for transfusion, the vet school certainly had their own blood donor horses (that could also be used for student handling) and my own vets used his own horse when they needed some- fewer logistics involved. 

I wouldn't send a horse of mine.


----------



## hippocobamus (28 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I would like to think I had the guts to do the same thing myself.
		
Click to expand...

Me too. It's a horrible thought and I don't believe that every horse should just be disposed of the minute that it is no longer deemed useful, however there are much worse fates. In reality, I know that i'll struggle to make the call whenever the time arises for mine, but hope that I can do the best for them, however hard it is.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (28 January 2014)

ester said:



			I have always thought that most of the blood from the commercial blood banks becomes products not used for transfusion, the vet school certainly had their own blood donor horses (that could also be used for student handling) and my own vets used his own horse when they needed some- fewer logistics involved. 

I wouldn't send a horse of mine.
		
Click to expand...


you are right,mostly they go for lab blood products used in tissue culture and microbial culture. There is specialised plasma used for treating certain diseases and this is collected from horses vaccinated several times with specific antigens against that particular disease. I am not sure if these blood bank companies are capable of producing these wrt facilities but they might do, the one I was involved with didnt at that time. I feel the term bloodbank is somewhat disingenuous tbh.

I am not massively for or against horses in bloodbanks and I do have the experience of seeing how the horses are kept in one regularly over eighteen months. Its not the worst life, its not the best either IME. Its not something I would choose for any of mine having experienced what I have.

People should be clued up about it though, its not some big altruistic heaven for broken horses to live out their lives. Visit a cattle shed over the winter (not saying there's anything wrong with that either before I get jumped on! Its just a bit removed from how most people view/look after horses)-thats how horses at the bloodbank are kept over the winter.


----------



## HashRouge (28 January 2014)

I do think we have a duty to our "useless valueless horses". I don't agree with just putting a horse to sleep because you don't like not being able to ride BUT I do think that is a better option that the horse being sold on with no thought for where it might end up, given that not many people want to buy an elderly and/ or unrideable horse just for the sake of it. But I would never have a horse put to sleep just because I wanted a new one that I could ride. I have a 20 year old mare atm who has been retired for a year or two now due to her arthritis. Every now and then I get on for a gentle potter down the lane, but that is it. I would love to have a riding horse, but I can't afford two. However, I've owned this horse for 12 years and I love the bones of her. She was bought for me when I was 11, so I have grown up with her, and she is wonderful, genuine, kind, and seriously good fun. She deserves a good retirement, and I'm going to give her one, even if it means I don't have a riding horse for another 10 years (though hopefully in a few years I'll be able to afford two). Basically, much as I want to be able to ride, this horse means more to me than riding does, much more. Obviously, to anyone else she is "useless" and "valueless" (my work mate has already asked me why I don't sell her and get something "better". I was not impressed!) but I really don't care. It is a shame that not everyone has the same attitude, but there you go. If you don't want to keep your horse because you can't ride it (or if can't keep it, but that is a bit different) then sadly PTS is often better that passing the horse on, unless you can guarantee it is going to a good home.


----------



## ester (28 January 2014)

yup I've used a lot of defibrinated horse blood in my time MotherOfChickens  and presumed that (and similar) was what the bloodbanks were most involved in providing, as much as anything because blood itself doesn't transport/last that well for distribution either so cheaper and easier for places to keep their own and yes I agree with you with the term possibly being disingenuous. I'm not anti PTS at all. My lad is now 21 and will probably have the opportunity to retire when the time comes back at mums or I would keep him for a time on livery if that seemed best. He certainly isn't having any change of ownership though.


----------



## Mithras (28 January 2014)

I don't really look on horses as being useless if they can't be ridden.  I buy a horse to be a horse and hopefully to do a job, which is mainly competing and hacking.  Its a bonus if they are good at it.  If I like the horse (and I usually do because I'm careful with what I buy) I will keep it to jump.  Once its jumped for a few years, it might sustain an injury (actually never happened with any of mine yet but it might) or go a bit stale or need an easier life.  

But its still a horse, still doing the job of being a horse which it was purchased as.  Its surely a risk you take when buying something made of flesh and blood that it will not prove suitable for the task intended, and you have it in your mind when directing yourself to the decision to buy.  If not, wouldn't you be better buying a mountain bike, or doing triathlon, or motorcycling, or cars, or something?


----------



## MotherOfChickens (28 January 2014)

ester said:



			yup I've used a lot of defibrinated horse blood in my time MotherOfChickens  .
		
Click to expand...

you never know who you are talking to on the internet


----------



## Tobiano (28 January 2014)

I do agree with the notion of owing something to a horse.  However, I don't agree that in every case it is necessarily to keep it and pay for it until it dies of natural causes.  In my teens I looked after someone else's horse and she had him PTS - well I would have sold a kidney to keep that horse until he it was best for him to go - but at 16 and not his owner I didnt have that option.  If I feel that way about a horse again it would be the same.

But take Harry.  Paid a fortune for him aged 6.  He was a bit too much for us and I was set to sell him but then we discovered he had bilateral bone spavin - aged 8.  Had him operated on and it helped a lot.  He is now 12.  He is on a bute a day, needs careful farriery, can't live out 24/7 because he has also had laminitis.  He is unpredictable to ride and we don't enjoy riding him.  He is now 12 and I have kept him at livery, being exercised by the yard staff, and with my daughter and I riding him as much as we can cope with, taking him out where we think its safe, for the last 6 years.  He has very frequent saddle checks and physio visits because of his issues.

I can never sell him with his issues, and I can't send him to retirement livery because he cannot live out 24/7.  In my book, if he becomes completely unrideable I think we have done right by him and he would be PTS at home even if he is just in his mid teens.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 January 2014)

Wagtail said:



			I would like to think I had the guts to do the same thing myself.
		
Click to expand...

Me too , 
However when your sons brothers and fathers where going too it might out a different complexion on it.


----------



## Cortez (28 January 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			Me too , 
However when your sons brothers and fathers where going too it might out a different complexion on it.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think it would, for me. The horses had no volition, the humans at least had some arguments to offer.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 January 2014)

I don't think it would for me either was just musing


----------



## honetpot (28 January 2014)

To night I have seen yet another advert on Facebook for a free equine if its gone by the weekend, there is a whole different world out there.


----------



## LaMooch (28 January 2014)

honetpot said:



			To night I have seen yet another advert on Facebook for a free equine if its gone by the weekend, there is a whole different world out there.
		
Click to expand...

So sad that people would do this


----------



## Echo Bravo (28 January 2014)

To me I think there are 2 types of people. Those that love and respect their animals, whether they feel the need to have their animal put down/or keep too the end of their natural life. I'm one of the lucky ones I own my own land, so yes I can keep them, but I also know when to let go, for the sake of the animal.


----------



## honetpot (29 January 2014)

LaMooch said:



			So sad that people would do this 

Click to expand...

That's why having something PTS can be a more positive outcome than.


----------

