# No, you do not 'love' your horse if...



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden. 

We all have different views, and it is true that the horse doesn't know it is going to be PTS because when it's dead, it's dead and so long as it is done well, then it is none the wiser. It does not suffer. If the owner has also taken care of it well throughout ownership, then they are a good owner from the horse's point of view. But please, people who state that they will PTS as soon as the horse cannot do its job, even if it is very happy and comfortable not being ridden, you do not love the horse. You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.

Now, I am not for one second condemning people who do this. Not one bit. I am just saying that they do not love their horse and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.


----------



## Akkalia1 (18 August 2016)

Can of worms I suspect. :|

However I rather agree. I kept my old mare for years and years when I could no longer ride her. I couldn't afford another while I still had her. But she was with me until she died, I loved her dearly and miss her every single day. I now have a new horse I can ride (when she's behaving!) but I would give absolutely anything to have my old girl back just so I could take care of her.


----------



## rowan666 (18 August 2016)

Couldn't agree more! (Just to reiterate I am also not condeming those who PTS)


----------



## Antw23uk (18 August 2016)

Have you spent the whole day on the crack pipe or just the afternoon?


----------



## Antw23uk (18 August 2016)

rowan666 said:



			Couldn't agree more! (Just to reiterate I am also not condeming those who PTS)
		
Click to expand...

Yes you are!


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

No one is condemning anyone for putting a horse to sleep when it can no longer work. I just get irritated when the same people say they love the horse. They do not. That is not to say that they cannot love a horse. They just obviously haven't owned it yet.


----------



## Antw23uk (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			No one is condemning anyone for putting a horse to sleep when it can no longer work. I just get irritated when the same people say they love the horse. They do not. That is not to say that they cannot love a horse. They just obviously haven't owned it yet.
		
Click to expand...

Your talking ******!


----------



## windand rain (18 August 2016)

the way I see it is quality over quantity I would PTS any animal or if allowed human if there quality of life was poor or in consttant pain. If however my ponies couldnt be ridden it wouldnt bother me in the slightest as long as their mental and physical welfare was good.


----------



## peaceandquiet1 (18 August 2016)

Everyone defines love differently. There was a cruelty case near us recently: the vet told me that the owner "loved" all the horses and couldn't face putting them down but they were not receiving the care they needed. I do agree with the OP though-love is so much more than having a horse to ride and compete with.


----------



## Tiddlypom (18 August 2016)

You've made your opinions clear on this in the past, OP.

I retire my oldies here at home, being blessed with the funds and the space to do so, as long as retirement is in their best interests and not because I'm too gutless to PTS. IMHO too many horses are kept going too long because their owner is too soft to PTS,  rather than being disposed of early.

I wouldn't dream of sending a permanently unsound horse off to the blood bank, either.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

windand rain said:



			the way I see it is quality over quantity I would PTS any animal or if allowed human if there quality of life was poor or in consttant pain. If however my ponies couldnt be ridden it wouldnt bother me in the slightest as long as their mental and physical welfare was good.
		
Click to expand...

Agree. It would be cruel not to PTS a horse that could not be comfortably retired and had a poor quality of life. Sometimes you have to PTS even when you love them. No one should keep a horse alive for their own benefit, which is an all too common thing.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (18 August 2016)

Tiddlypom said:



			I retire my oldies here at home, being blessed with the funds and the space to do so, as long as retirement is in their best interests and not because I'm too gutless to PTS. IMHO too many horses are kept going too long because their owner is too soft to PTS,  rather than being disposed of early.

I wouldn't dream of sending a permanently unsound horse off to the blood bank, either.
		
Click to expand...

this.


----------



## milliepops (18 August 2016)

Tiddlypom said:



			You've made your opinions clear on this in the past, OP.

I retire my oldies here at home, being blessed with the funds and the space to do so, as long as retirement is in their best interests and not because I'm too gutless to PTS.* IMHO too many horses are kept going too long because their owner is too soft to PTS,  rather than being disposed of early.*

I wouldn't dream of sending a permanently unsound horse off to the blood bank, either.
		
Click to expand...

Agree. 
TBH I wouldn't presume to tell anyone how they feel about their horse when they are facing retirement, nor to question their decisions provided the horse wasn't suffering. None of my business.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

I'm not saying something is not right. We all have different views on that. I am saying that people should not say they love their horses when they don't.


----------



## buddylove (18 August 2016)

milliepops said:



			Agree. 
TBH I wouldn't presume to tell anyone how they feel about their horse when they are facing retirement, nor to question their decisions provided the horse wasn't suffering. None of my business.
		
Click to expand...

^^^^ This!!


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

horsemadmum1 said:



			Everyone defines love differently. There was a cruelty case near us recently: the vet told me that the owner "loved" all the horses and couldn't face putting them down but they were not receiving the care they needed. I do agree with the OP though-love is so much more than having a horse to ride and compete with.
		
Click to expand...

That's what I am getting at. If you love a horse that much, unless its quality of life is compromised, there is no way you could just kill it. Because there is more to horses than just riding. Ill-health has meant that I have been unable to ride for months, but I love just being with them and caring for them. They are not just riding machines.

However, this thread is not trying to say people who think differently to me are wrong, just that they do not know what it is like to really love a horse if they intend to PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden.

I agree too, that some people can be cruel keeping horses alive when they should be PTS and they do not love their horses either. They just think they do.


----------



## Mollylittle (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			That's what I am getting at. If you love a horse that much, unless its quality of life is compromised, there is no way you could just kill it. Because there is more to horses than just riding. Ill-health has meant that I have been unable to ride for months, but I love just being with them and caring for them. They are not just riding machines.

However, this thread is not trying to say people who think differently to me are wrong, just that they do not know what it is like to really love a horse if they intend to PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden.

I agree too, that some people can be cruel keeping horses alive when they should be PTS and they do not love their horses either. They just think they do.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed. I have a 35 year old gal here with me who served her whole life faithfully at a riding school, only to be discarded at age 33. She was due to go to the meat-man. I offered  her a retirement home and she's still here,happy out, munching away on the filed with my 6 others. I LOVE horses. I don't care if they earn their keep or not.They deserve a retirement just like human beings.And would you know it...it is as if she knows.The most loving old gal ever.


----------



## AmieeT (18 August 2016)

That is you opinion- you cannot tell people that they don't love their horse based on YOUR opinion.

I wouldn't do PTS rather than retire either, but I still don't agree with you.


----------



## Mollylittle (18 August 2016)

whilst I think the statement is a bit black and white, I do believe that you don't hurt what you love. being able to put your own horse to sleep just because he or she became to old and too frail to carry you anymore - I don't think you could do that if you really loved your horse. So yes, I would agree guardedly to the statement.Guardedly because we can never truly understand the feelings of another human being and are only ever able to understand them based on our own experiences.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (18 August 2016)

How long is a piece of string here? 

I have a 25yr old who is rideable for hacking, pleasure rides, light schooling etc but his serious competition days are behind him. Even if he isn't rideable he will be kept as long as he is comfortable UN-medicated. As soon as he gets to a point where he needs daily medication to keep him field sound then I would have to make w decision. Now if anyone were to tell me I didn't love my horse because I don't believe in daily meds to remain field sound it wouldn't bother me in the slightest. I've had him 15 years after all through thick and thin. I don't judge anyone who does the opposite of me, it is their choice after all. Trying to measure by PTS triggers how's much someone else Loves their horse says more about the person passing judgement than the owner of the horse. 

A few people here have just shown themselves to be judgemental t0$$ers and have went down quite a lot in my estimations. Quite an eye opener really.


----------



## ihatework (18 August 2016)

Tiddlypom said:



			So true. And it's often those owners that 'love their horses so much' who delay the PTS decision too long. I have someone in mind as I type.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Mollylittle (18 August 2016)

ihatework said:



			So true. And it's often those owners that 'love their horses so much' who delay the PTS decision too long. I have someone in mind as I type.
		
Click to expand...

I know a few of those as well. For me, quality of live is the determining factor.Even more than cats, horses are prone to keep up appearances.It is up to us humans to determine if a horse is suffering and when the quality of life has been impacted. I put my old sport horse to sleep a few months back, she had cancer-at 24.I was able to keep her pain free and happy for 3 month after diagnoses, knowing time would be very limited.It is a call you make. But, putting a horse to sleep just because he or she is of no use to the owner anymore doesn't sit well with me.


----------



## Akkalia1 (18 August 2016)

I didn't think this was about horses being kept going too long or being medicated just to stay field sound? Those are separate issues and ones I wouldn't do either. It broke my heart when I had to make the decision for my mare. But I know she was a happy healthy (unmedicated) horse up until that point who'd enjoyed her retirement - at the detriment to my bank balance on many an occasion!


----------



## D66 (18 August 2016)

You don't own the definition of "Love".


----------



## Luci07 (18 August 2016)

This opens a can of worms. Horse folk are the absolute worse for being fixed in their opinions and often take very poorly to different views.

I kept, out of choice, my retired mare of a small yard on sort of part livery because she hated living out. She had her own stable which she could choose to use (and did) and a small herd of close friends (2 others). I really struggled to keep her like this but said mare was sound, happy and loving life. She was PTS about 4 months ago as was starting to show signs of confusion and at 30, I wasn't going to start trying to work her up to get to the source. However, I owed this mare big time and loved her dearly. I have had horses that I would not have carried for so long in retirement, so yes, I do understand what Wagtail is saying,


----------



## FlyingCircus (18 August 2016)

I would rather people put their unrideable horses to sleep instead of giving them away/selling them. This is if they have no job (eg, can't be broodmare because hereditary issue, not good enough breeding/ a hard keeper that couldn't be an easy companion).

I feel like if you really loved a horse, you'd keep it even if it was unrideable, to atleast give it SOME level of retirement. (ETA: By this, I mean atleast a summer or two. Not just instant PTS of field sound and happy horse just because it served its purpose).

Personally, I adore my horse more than anything. He has had various soundness issues that have made me consider if I would PTS if he wouldn't be rideable anymore. The answer is, nope 100%. As long as he's still happy and sound in a field being a horse, he can stay around as long as he fancies! I would miss riding, I couldn't currently afford another, but you know what...I love him that much that sitting on his back and jumping things isn't all that important to me in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Theocat (18 August 2016)

This is aimed directly at me.

Wagtail, love isn't a fixed, absolute thing, and even in relationships between humans whether love exists or survives depends on so many circumstances - not just the individuals involved.  It is possible to genuinely love someone (or something) and for that love to change or fade if circumstances change.  

Imagine a scenario where a couple fell in love over a mutual love of cycling, and had years of being in love and cycling together.  One day, one of them no longer can, or will, get on a bike.  Easy enough to image that the relationship could change - you're a fool if you think otherwise.

I love my horse - but I also love riding.  If the latter was removed, I'd still have the horse - but I would lose a very large part of the enjoyment of my life.  It would still be costing me a fortune.  I am honest enough to admit that I am human.  I know that my feelings towards the horse are likely to change as the circumstances change.  That doesn't mean a lack of love.

For those who love the horse but send it away to retirement livery or a blood bank - I don't have a problem with that, and it's certainly none of my business.  But fundamentally, what's in it for the horse?  Why is a longer life better than a short one?  And what is the owner getting out of it?  If they love the horse (more than those ghastly ones amongst us who would put down instead) how can they bear to be parted from it?  I can't see that keeping a horse alive and sending it away shows any more love than having it put down.

I'd love to have my own grounds and keep my happy retired horses forever more.  I don't, and I'm honest enough to admit that paying out hundreds of pounds a month, when I can no longer ride, would affect my feelings for my horse.  That doesn't mean there's no love there.

You may stick your nose in and judge all you like when the welfare of an animal is compromised.  You have no right  to pass public judgement on how others must feel, and you certainly cannot know it.


----------



## Cortez (18 August 2016)

I wish people would love their horses less and take care of them more. IME it is the animal lovers who tend to keep their horses (and other animals) going far, far longer than is kind or reasonable, because they "love them too much to kill them".


----------



## ElizabethAngela (18 August 2016)

I had my horse pts as soon as his ridden career was over. He did one last BE event and was euthanised a week later. The horse had a condition which could no longer be managed to keep him sound. The horse loved his work, would never retire.  and I loved the horse.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Antw23uk said:



			Your talking ******!
		
Click to expand...

I find that highly offensive. It should be _you're_.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Mollylittle said:



			Agreed. I have a 35 year old gal here with me who served her whole life faithfully at a riding school, only to be discarded at age 33. She was due to go to the meat-man. I offered  her a retirement home and she's still here,happy out, munching away on the filed with my 6 others. I LOVE horses. I don't care if they earn their keep or not.They deserve a retirement just like human beings.And would you know it...it is as if she knows.The most loving old gal ever.

Click to expand...

I find that some animals just know when they have landed on their feet. We have owned many dogs, but one current one (we are her fourth home) has now been with us 8 years and you can really tell just how 'grateful' she is. When we got her she was very withdrawn, but now she is just so faithful and loving. Your old girl sounds lovely and very lucky to have you.


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			No one is condemning anyone for putting a horse to sleep when it can no longer work. I just get irritated when the same people say they love the horse. They do not. That is not to say that they cannot love a horse. They just obviously haven't owned it yet.
		
Click to expand...

You are talking complete rubbish .
Your experiance must be narrower than I thought .
There are many many reasons to pts horses who are no longer working .
Frankly I have no time for people who think that those who don't take their view on this issue don't love and care for their horses .
I don't accuse those who retire horses of thinking more about their own feeling than their horses when they keep old lame horses going limping round the fields and I don't say what I think about sending  pampered horses used to being treated as individuals to places like the blood bank because I know there's a range of views about this sort of thing .


----------



## C1airey (18 August 2016)

Who on earth has the right to judge someone else's definition or degree of love?  How arrogant!

When my horse can no longer be ridden, he will be euthanised. It will be in his best interest. 

When I can no longer enjoy life, I would like to be euthanised. Sadly, it is a privilege denied to me.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Akkalia1 said:



			I didn't think this was about horses being kept going too long or being medicated just to stay field sound? Those are separate issues and ones I wouldn't do either. It broke my heart when I had to make the decision for my mare. But I know she was a happy healthy (unmedicated) horse up until that point who'd enjoyed her retirement - at the detriment to my bank balance on many an occasion!
		
Click to expand...

You are right. This thread is not about owners' preferences of when a horse should be put to sleep. That is their own opinion and some people refuse to medicate (and I understand why - I am torn on that issue myself). The thread is also not saying people who put unrideable but otherwise healthy horses are bad owners, or are wrong to do what they choose to do. It is totally their decision and they should do whatever they are most comfortable with. All I am saying is that they have not experienced loving their horse for itself and therefore should not say 'I intend to put my horse to sleep as soon as he can no longer be ridden.' And then go on to say 'I love my horse.' Because you could not possibly do that if you love your horse as a horse and not just an animal to be ridden.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Luci07 said:



			This opens a can of worms. Horse folk are the absolute worse for being fixed in their opinions and often take very poorly to different views.

I kept, out of choice, my retired mare of a small yard on sort of part livery because she hated living out. She had her own stable which she could choose to use (and did) and a small herd of close friends (2 others). I really struggled to keep her like this but said mare was sound, happy and loving life. She was PTS about 4 months ago as was starting to show signs of confusion and at 30, I wasn't going to start trying to work her up to get to the source. However, I owed this mare big time and loved her dearly. I have had horses that I would not have carried for so long in retirement, so yes, I do understand what Wagtail is saying,
		
Click to expand...

Thank you. I admit that I did not love every horse I have owned. I have been fond of them all, but truly loved only one. I am on my way to truly loving my current mare, I love her more each day. It's something which grows, I think. 

Nothing wrong with choosing to put a horse to sleep so long as it is done properly, and there are loads of reasons, financial, ethical and humane for doing so. But to put a horse to sleep just because it can no longer carry you is not love. But it is also not wrong. Just don't say you love the horse.


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You are right. This thread is not about owners' preferences of when a horse should be put to sleep. That is their own opinion and some people refuse to medicate (and I understand why - I am torn on that issue myself). The thread is also not saying people who put unrideable but otherwise healthy horses are bad owners, or are wrong to do what they choose to do. It is totally their decision and they should do whatever they are most comfortable with. All I am saying is that they have not experienced loving their horse for itself and therefore should not say 'I intend to put my horse to sleep as soon as he can no longer be ridden.' And then go on to say 'I love my horse.' Because you could not possibly do that if you love your horse as a horse and not just an animal to be ridden.
		
Click to expand...

And I am saying you are talking nonsense .
What gives you the right to judge how much people love their horses .
I would never ever allow one of my horses pass from my care when it was no longer sound I find the idea of doing so repellant on every level .
But I would never say that gives me the right to say those who do that don't love their horses .


----------



## Cortez (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You are right. This thread is not about owners' preferences of when a horse should be put to sleep. That is their own opinion and some people refuse to medicate (and I understand why - I am torn on that issue myself). The thread is also not saying people who put unrideable but otherwise healthy horses are bad owners, or are wrong to do what they choose to do. It is totally their decision and they should do whatever they are most comfortable with. All I am saying is that they have not experienced loving their horse for itself and therefore should not say 'I intend to put my horse to sleep as soon as he can no longer be ridden.' And then go on to say 'I love my horse.' Because you could not possibly do that if you love your horse as a horse and not just an animal to be ridden.
		
Click to expand...

Who on earth are you to decide what love means?


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			Who on earth are you to decide what love means?
		
Click to expand...

Excellent question Cortez , perhaps Op would be so good as to answer that .


----------



## Mongoose11 (18 August 2016)

How are you able to say that someone who makes a different  choice to the one you would make does not love their horse? They can stand in front of you and say 'yes I do' and what makes you right and them wrong? Your version of life and love with a horse is the one where an owner looks after the horse until it's old age and their version is simply different. Is it cruelty to put an animal down after providing for it during a long ridden career and then not wishing to anymore? Is it cruelty? If it isn't then who is anyone to say they didn't love the horse?


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

[sings - cover your ears] What is love...anyway? Does anybody love anybody anyway?


----------



## Rowreach (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you. I admit that I did not love every horse I have owned. I have been fond of them all, but truly loved only one. I am on my way to truly loving my current mare, I love her more each day. It's something which grows, I think. 

Nothing wrong with choosing to put a horse to sleep so long as it is done properly, and there are loads of reasons, financial, ethical and humane for doing so. But to put a horse to sleep just because it can no longer carry you is not love. But it is also not wrong. Just don't say you love the horse.
		
Click to expand...

I can say whatever I like.


----------



## Whoopit (18 August 2016)

But unreasonable to suggest to really.

Supposing the current horse is unrideable and they can't afford to keep it until it's dying day and buy another one or can't afford vet fees (since insurance usually exempts things after having to pay out) for any reason for the next ten years until it dies of its own accord?


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			[sings - cover your ears] What is love...anyway? Does anybody love anybody anyway? 

Click to expand...

So now you think it's funny you post deeply insult everyone who does hold your views and then think it's funny.
Your some piece of work.


----------



## Mongoose11 (18 August 2016)

My mother in law kept her dog in a state for twelve months despite my advice and that of the vets and this was all in the name of love. There are owners here who have done the same with their horses after having retired them for 10 years or more. How does that sit with your version of love?


----------



## C1airey (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			[sings - cover your ears] What is love...anyway? Does anybody love anybody anyway? 

Click to expand...

If you didn't have so many posts to your name, I would honestly assume you were a troll.  That or a 12yo with nothing better to do in the holidays than stir up a forum with hurtful blanket judgements of those who have made the hardest of decisions. I would hope that reading back over this, you might be ashamed of your pronouncements.  I won't be surprised if we differ in our opinion of shame, like we do that of love.


----------



## AandK (18 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			I wish people would love their horses less and take care of them more. IME it is the animal lovers who tend to keep their horses (and other animals) going far, far longer than is kind or reasonable, because they "love them too much to kill them".
		
Click to expand...

Spot on.  Of course it is that bit harder when it is your own animal, but there are far too many left to suffer because the owner can't bear to let them go...


----------



## piglet2001 (18 August 2016)

I have a horse that is field sound but only 9. I am afraid that he will be being put down before the winter. He has had 15,000 spent on vets fees, but he is still not up to ridden work and there are certainly some psychological issues. He has had a couple of years being a horse in a field with friends and lots of love BUT this could go on for 20 years as he is so young. I find it insulting you would say I do not LOVE him! I have given him more than many would but in can not go on forever. I do not think this is harsh or unloving but actually KIND!


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

piglet2001 said:



			I have a horse that is field sound but only 9. I am afraid that he will be being put down before the winter. He has had 15,000 spent on vets fees, but he is still not up to ridden work and there are certainly some psychological issues. He has had a couple of years being a horse in a field with friends and lots of love BUT this could go on for 20 years as he is so young. I find it insulting you would say I do not LOVE him! I have given him more than many would but in can not go on forever. I do not think this is harsh or unloving but actually KIND!
		
Click to expand...

Well I can believe you love your horse .


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Whoopit said:



			But unreasonable to suggest to really.

Supposing the current horse is unrideable and they can't afford to keep it until it's dying day and buy another one or can't afford vet fees (since insurance usually exempts things after having to pay out) for any reason for the next ten years until it dies of its own accord?
		
Click to expand...

As I said, nothing wrong in that. If you have to PTS for financial reason, then it would be a very painful decision to make if you love the horse, even if you're just fond of it.

I just think 'love' is a very strong word which people use too lightly. It devalues the word.


----------



## Asha (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden. 

We all have different views, and it is true that the horse doesn't know it is going to be PTS because when it's dead, it's dead and so long as it is done well, then it is none the wiser. It does not suffer. If the owner has also taken care of it well throughout ownership, then they are a good owner from the horse's point of view. But please, people who state that they will PTS as soon as the horse cannot do its job, even if it is very happy and comfortable not being ridden, you do not love the horse. You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.

Now, I am not for one second condemning people who do this. Not one bit. I am just saying that they do not love their horse and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.
		
Click to expand...

After spending the afternoon at the vets with my youngster, who I bred myself, out of my wonderful ole girl, I can assure you I love this horse with all my heart. Since the day she was born we have had an amazing bond.

She hasn't been herself, and while waiting with her at the vets it looked like she had navicular and suspensory damage. showing 3/10 lame. I was in no doubt, that if the xrays confirmed that, I would PTS. 

To me this would have saved her from living in pain for the next 20 odd years, would it have saved me from pain, no I would have been distraught. But comfortable in the knowledge that I did the right thing by her.

Your post is in bad taste.


----------



## nicky_jakey (18 August 2016)

What a complete & utter load of noncense wagtail... 
Loving your horse is about doing the right thing by him or her. Putting to sleep (& being brave enough to make that decision) when necessary. 
Some horses aren't able to cope with a non ridden retirement - I know mine wouldn't have done - so I did the honourable thing and put him to sleep. You know nothing about the situation & I'm not about to discuss it on here, but you should keep your sweeping generalisations to yourself! 
Loving a horse is about giving it the best possible home for 14 years of his life, with no expense spared. Also an appropriate and dignified end to his life when the time very sadly came.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

piglet2001 said:



			I have a horse that is field sound but only 9. I am afraid that he will be being put down before the winter. He has had 15,000 spent on vets fees, but he is still not up to ridden work and there are certainly some psychological issues. He has had a couple of years being a horse in a field with friends and lots of love BUT this could go on for 20 years as he is so young. I find it insulting you would say I do not LOVE him! I have given him more than many would but in can not go on forever. I do not think this is harsh or unloving but actually KIND!
		
Click to expand...

So it is a financial decision. Why would I think that is unkind or unloving? If you cannot afford to keep him for 20 years I don't think that is unloving.


----------



## Dunlin (18 August 2016)

For me it's about quality of life. Having had 2 horses retire to grass it was a pleasure watching them hoon around, roll about and graze. They certainly didn't seem too bothered about not having a purpose! I got fed up of the comments about having field ornaments, my horse, my money I'll do what I please. The first sign they were not happy with the way things were I had them pts.

What I didn't agree with was a woman I knew who spoke in the most savage of manner about her hunters. "This one is no use anymore, arrange to have it shot tomorrow". Disgusting. It sadly became a running joke with me and my boyfriend at the time, my car broke down one day, he just looked at me and said "shoot it".


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			As I said, nothing wrong in that. If you have to PTS for financial reason, then it would be a very painful decision to make if you love the horse, even if you're just fond of it.

I just think 'love' is a very strong word which people use too lightly. It devalues the word.
		
Click to expand...

you can think things all you like ,you can be curious about why people do and say things but you can't make the judgement that others don't love just because they take a certain course of action with a horse you don't know an owner knows a horse best .
I think retirement is a difficult thing particularly when livery with decent large fields avialable all year round is so difficult to find .
Personally I would not want to keep a old unridden horse in a small paddock alone as is the best many liverys can offer in winter and I would not keep one on hard standings it's is IMO not a stimulating enough situation or offering enough movement for an unworked horse .
I totally understand why many who love deeply pts their horses st the end of their working lives .


----------



## Illusion100 (18 August 2016)

Wow, just Wow!

I was going to express myself in more detail but honestly feel it's best just to walk away from this thread.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

nicky_jakey said:



			What a complete & utter load of noncense wagtail... 
Loving your horse is about doing the right thing by him or her. Putting to sleep (& being brave enough to make that decision) when necessary. 
Some horses aren't able to cope with a non ridden retirement - I know mine wouldn't have done - so I did the honourable thing and put him to sleep. You know nothing about the situation & I'm not about to discuss it on here, but you should keep your sweeping generalisations to yourself! 
Loving a horse is about giving it the best possible home for 14 years of his life, with no expense spared. Also an appropriate and dignified end to his life when the time very sadly came.
		
Click to expand...

If you read my and other posts I am talking about people putting to sleep JUST because the horse cannot be ridden anymore. Notice I said horses that could happily and comfortably retire. You made the decision based on the knowledge of your horse; that he would not be able to happily retire. That is not the same at all.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Asha said:



			After spending the afternoon at the vets with my youngster, who I bred myself, out of my wonderful ole girl, I can assure you I love this horse with all my heart. Since the day she was born we have had an amazing bond.

She hasn't been herself, and while waiting with her at the vets it looked like she had navicular and suspensory damage. showing 3/10 lame. I was in no doubt, that if the xrays confirmed that, I would PTS. 

To me this would have saved her from living in pain for the next 20 odd years, would it have saved me from pain, no I would have been distraught. But comfortable in the knowledge that I did the right thing by her.

Your post is in bad taste.
		
Click to expand...

Did you read my OP? Completely different to your situation.


----------



## Fairynuff (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			No one is condemning anyone for putting a horse to sleep when it can no longer work. I just get irritated when the same people say they love the horse. They do not. That is not to say that they cannot love a horse. They just obviously haven't owned it yet.
		
Click to expand...

who are you to judge others and what they feel ?


----------



## windand rain (18 August 2016)

I think what wagtail is trying to say is you cannot love your horse if you can happily say "this one is broken shoot it so I can have a new one" not those that have horses that are not fit to retire or people who cannot afford to keep them in retirement.
We have become a disposable society where things have no futher use to us are just discarded. I actually agree with her I too have met people who will say they love an animal but will discard it when it is old or needs more than they aer willing to give. Classic as an elderly german shepherd thrown from a moving car. I am sure that family loved him while he was a young and vibrant animal


----------



## Fairynuff (18 August 2016)

windand rain said:



			I think what wagtail is trying to say is you cannot love your horse if you can happily say "this one is broken shoot it so I can have a new one" not those that have horses that are not fit to retire or people who cannot afford to keep them in retirement.
We have become a disposable society where things have no futher use to us are just discarded. I actually agree with her I too have met people who will say they love an animal but will discard it when it is old or needs more than they aer willing to give. Classic as an elderly german shepherd thrown from a moving car. I am sure that family loved him while he was a young and vibrant animal
		
Click to expand...

no, Wagtail just likes the attention


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

windand rain said:



			I think what wagtail is trying to say is you cannot love your horse if you can happily say "this one is broken shoot it so I can have a new one" not those that have horses that are not fit to retire or people who cannot afford to keep them in retirement.
We have become a disposable society where things have no futher use to us are just discarded. I actually agree with her I too have met people who will say they love an animal but will discard it when it is old or needs more than they aer willing to give. Classic as an elderly german shepherd thrown from a moving car. I am sure that family loved him while he was a young and vibrant animal
		
Click to expand...

Thank you. That is exactly what I am trying to say.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (18 August 2016)

Goldenstar said:



			You are talking complete rubbish .
Your experiance must be narrower than I thought .
There are many many reasons to pts horses who are no longer working .
Frankly I have no time for people who think that those who don't take their view on this issue don't love and care for their horses .
I don't accuse those who retire horses of thinking more about their own feeling than their horses when they keep old lame horses going limping round the fields and I don't say what I think about sending  pampered horses used to being treated as individuals to places like the blood bank because I know there's a range of views about this sort of thing .
		
Click to expand...




Goldenstar said:



			And I am saying you are talking nonsense .
What gives you the right to judge how much people love their horses .
I would never ever allow one of my horses pass from my care when it was no longer sound I find the idea of doing so repellant on every level .
But I would never say that gives me the right to say those who do that don't love their horses .
		
Click to expand...




Cortez said:



			Who on earth are you to decide what love means?
		
Click to expand...




Goldenstar said:



			So now you think it's funny you post deeply insult everyone who does hold your views and then think it's funny.
Your some piece of work.
		
Click to expand...

Very good posts 

Wagtail you are not showing yourself in the best light at all. As the thread has gone on you are making yourself out to be an idiot.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

Post a similar thread on a dog forum and what a different picture it would be.

My dog can't do agility anymore so I will PTS and get a new one, but I really love him.


----------



## Fairynuff (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Post a similar thread on a dog forum and what a different picture it would be.

My dog can't do agility anymore so I will PTS and get a new one, but I really love him.
		
Click to expand...

Ive been away for a few years and come back to find you exactly the same, full of your own importance and bull. You really are one consistent person


----------



## nicky_jakey (18 August 2016)

i find you completely insulting - I quote from your initial post:
"You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden." 
So why are you trying to insult both mine and others intelligence by going back on that now...???? 
You know nothing of other situations and seem to take pleasure from insulting others with crass generalisations.... 
Think before you post such rubbish next time, extremely thoughtless.


----------



## Mrs B (18 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			Who on earth are you to decide what love means?
		
Click to expand...

This. 

It's arrogant to presume you know what 'love' is in the first place, it's ignorant to presume other's don't and it's sanctimonious in that you believe your level of love is the true one and above others'.


----------



## SpringArising (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Post a similar thread on a dog forum and what a different picture it would be.

My dog can't do agility anymore so I will PTS and get a new one, but I really love him.
		
Click to expand...

Wagtail that's a rubbish analogy. A dog costs a tenth of the price of a horse.


----------



## tomspride (18 August 2016)

Wagtail, what about people who ride their horses and ponies when they are clearly too heavy, do they love their horses?


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (18 August 2016)

Wagtail,  this time you have really gone too far. How can you make such a sweeping accusation in such a flippant way?

You do this type of thread, stating how very right and moral you are, every so often.

You do NOT  have the right to make such a derogatory statement, I disagree with you.

Perhaps you ought to come on some FATE visits, then perhaps you might rethink moving from your very high pedestal  :mad3:


----------



## Leo Walker (18 August 2016)

tomspride said:



			Wagtail, what about people who ride their horses and ponies when they are clearly too heavy, do they love their horses?
		
Click to expand...

Oh god, dont go there! The OP has some weird issue with weight as it is.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

SpringArising said:



			Wagtail that's a rubbish analogy. A dog costs a tenth of the price of a horse.
		
Click to expand...

No, it's not because I am not talking about whether it is right or wrong, I am talking about if you really do love an animal you could not PTS just because you couldn't ride it. If you can't afford it or it is in pain, or personal circumstances change such as divorce, then that's entirely different. But then most people posting on this thread already know what I mean.


----------



## tomspride (18 August 2016)

FrankieCob said:



			Oh god, dont go there! The OP has some weird issue with weight as it is.
		
Click to expand...

oh dear, should be interesting hahaha


----------



## MargotC (18 August 2016)

If you take money entirely out of the equation, and have no trouble supporting as many retirees in the field as you wish for as long as you wish, and you still choose to put a horse to sleep provided it would be happy and easily kept as a field ornament I can see the reasoning behind the argument. But realistically how many horse owners does that utopical situation apply to? If wishes were horses and all that.

There might be a permille of people who view a horse as a disposable means to a goal, and who have no true interest in its wellbeing beyond reaching that goal, but I would maintain the majority of regular owners who have to make the call love the horse in question and make the call due to several contributing factors outside of their control. It is, I presume, that former permille this thread is aimed at.

"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more." It is of course possible to truly love more than one thing at the same time. I would caution against hastily villifying a person who has to make the choice between letting go of a horse they love and keeping the horse but being unable to do what they love. Hypothetically if a horse breaks down and you keep it you might be unable to ride for well over a decade by which time you might yourself be unable to return to it. I daresay that hopeless choice is what many people face and choosing one over the other would to me say little about whether your love for the horse is "genuine".

I would personally rather a horse be put to sleep whilst in good condition rather than face an uncertain future and ultimately meet the same end.


----------



## Wagtail (18 August 2016)

MargotC said:



			If you take money entirely out of the equation, and have no trouble supporting as many retirees in the field as you wish for as long as you wish, and you still choose to put a horse to sleep provided it would be happy and easily kept as a field ornament I can see the reasoning behind the argument. But realistically how many horse owners does that utopical situation apply to? If wishes were horses and all that.

There might be a permille of people who view a horse as a disposable means to a goal, and who have no true interest in its wellbeing beyond reaching that goal, but I would maintain the majority of regular owners who have to make the call love the horse in question and make the call due to several contributing factors outside of their control. It is, I presume, that former permille this thread is aimed at.

"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more." It is of course possible to truly love more than one thing at the same time. I would caution against hastily villifying a person who has to make the choice between letting go of a horse they love and keeping the horse but being unable to do what they love. Hypothetically if a horse breaks down and you keep it you might be unable to ride for well over a decade by which time you might yourself be unable to return to it. I daresay that hopeless choice is what many people face and choosing one over the other would to me say little about whether your love for the horse is "genuine".

I would personally rather a horse be put to sleep whilst in good condition rather than face an uncertain future and ultimately meet the same end.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for your constructive post. You make some very good points. I was in a situation with my late mare where I could not afford another horse for a long time (as it turned out it was 3 years, but at the time I thought it would be permanent). I missed being able to ride her so much. But ultimately our bond was deeper than that and I loved her as a 'person' more than I loved being able to ride. The thought of putting her to sleep so I could get a new ridden horse was totally out of the question. That is why I am questioning why people can be happily riding their fully functioning horse and state that when they cannot be ridden they will PTS so they can have a new one, but then profess to love the horse. It is not love as I know it.


----------



## Evie91 (18 August 2016)

I do somewhat agree to what Wagtail is saying, as explained by windandrain. When my horse was retired I spent a small fortune keeping her in the style as to which she had become accustomed. I could only afford one horse, but I loved that horse to bits and begrudged her nothing. It meant I couldn't ride and was well aware that she could go on for years, but to have her with me was worth it. She was PTS when she became ill.
Think people seem to be bringing lots of other issues into this. I don't believe in keeping horses going when the are in pain, but would medicate if needed.
I do think we are becoming a disposable society and it troubles me, some folks attitude to animals, elderly and even their own children. Hate to see older horses being rehomed but I admit I am very soft hearted!
Not sure about the cycling analogy either, if my husband could not do all he does now, would I still love him, yes absolutely!
I've no desire to cast judgment on others and that is not the purpose of my thread, just wanted to put a view point across.


----------



## Asha (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Did you read my OP? Completely different to your situation.
		
Click to expand...

Considering I quoted your original post, then it's clear I did read it.

I find your posts on this sad. One because I had a close call today and thought I had to make a difficult call. But more importantly because others may be in this situation and read this.


----------



## Evie91 (18 August 2016)

Sorry if post does not make much sense on some heavy prescription meds today!


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

tomspride said:



			Wagtail, what about people who ride their horses and ponies when they are clearly too heavy, do they love their horses?
		
Click to expand...

Noooooo please nooooo .


----------



## {97702} (18 August 2016)

Ah the troll in their purest format.... Wagtail you are a total pleb with absolutely no understanding of individUal circumstance......


----------



## MargotC (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you for your constructive post. You make some very good points. I was in a situation with my late mare where I could not afford another horse for a long time (as it turned out it was 3 years, but at the time I thought it would be permanent). I missed being able to ride her so much. But ultimately our bond was deeper than that and I loved her as a 'person' more than I loved being able to ride. The thought of putting her to sleep so I could get a new ridden horse was totally out of the question. That is why I am questioning why people can be happily riding their fully functioning horse and state that when they cannot be ridden they will PTS so they can have a new one, but then profess to love the horse. It is not love as I know it.
		
Click to expand...

I have been in a similar situation and made the opposite call. I still struggle with that years on in spite of it being right at the time. I agree that "going in" before the fact with that "disposable" approach to a currently healthy horse or indeed any animal does boggle. You cannot really know what is the right decision for you until you find yourself having to make it.

Perhaps the attitude that is demonstrated by a permille of people illustrates how easily horse ownership can be gained? The easier an animal is to acquire the easier it seems to be to dispose of it when it becomes inconvenient and this seems to apply across species and hobbies.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you for your constructive post. You make some very good points. I was in a situation with my late mare where I could not afford another horse for a long time (as it turned out it was 3 years, but at the time I thought it would be permanent). I missed being able to ride her so much. But ultimately our bond was deeper than that and I loved her as a 'person' more than I loved being able to ride. The thought of putting her to sleep so I could get a new ridden horse was totally out of the question. That is why I am questioning why people can be happily riding their fully functioning horse and state that when they cannot be ridden they will PTS so they can have a new one, but then profess to love the horse. It is not love as I know it.
		
Click to expand...

was this the same mare that had a protracted recovery to being field sound and about which you had much support about on this forum?


----------



## eggs (18 August 2016)

Maybe I've just been lucky (although I doubt it) but in nearly 40 years of riding and then owning horses I have never met anyone who has had a horse PTS just because it could no longer be ridden when it could have a suitable retirement.


----------



## Dave's Mam (18 August 2016)

FrankieCob said:



			Oh god, dont go there! The OP has some weird issue with weight as it is.
		
Click to expand...

I remember that one.

Wagtail, I find your OP & your following posts insulting & frankly derogatory.


----------



## SusieT (18 August 2016)

totally agree. if you love the horse, taking good care of it in retirement is what you do when it can't be ridden but is happy in the field. if you aren't willing to do this or make excuses that the horse ' would miss being stabled' without even giving it a good try, you just want a horse to ride.


----------



## ycbm (18 August 2016)

It's not only about love, though I get the gist of what Wagtail is saying. It's also about how much you value life for its own sake. 

I do have land and I have enough money to keep horses retired. Most of the horses I have owned have never made a big enough impact on my heart to mean that I would keep them retired. I have had one, (but he had to go to flat ground and work), and I think I probably have one now. So yes, I simply do/did not love the others as much.

I can't really imagine a situation where a horse can't hack about where I would be satisfied (given that they can't talk) that they were not in pain or distress retired.

But even if I could, I simply don't value life strongly enough, even for myself, to believe that it matters one jot how many retired days my horse might be given. It also matters more to me to know for certain that they never suffer a mute and inescapable  degradation in their quality of life. 

I would rather everyone in the country put every horse to sleep the moment it can't work any more, than witness one of the poor creatures I sometimes see being kept alive because people love them too much to let them go


----------



## Alec Swan (18 August 2016)

MargotC said:



			... You cannot really know what is the right decision for you until you find yourself having to make it.

.. .
		
Click to expand...

And best we consider this before we judge.

Alec.


----------



## piglet2001 (18 August 2016)

Goldenstar said:



			Well I can believe you love your horse .
		
Click to expand...

Thank you goldenstar

I love him dearly. But 20 years is a long time for a young horse who I am not ashamed to say that I bought to do a job (to hunt) before ultimately selling him.

Some would have unscrupulously sold him I am sure as he would pass a 2 stage but not withstand any work.

Instead I loved him, had him insured luckily, tried barefoot (he still is) along with regular physio etc. I am going to say good bye due to him having no job, I could keep him financially - but why? I feel I have given him a lovely last few years with plenty of food, nice friends and 24/7 turnout. I felt I owed it to him after he had a horrid start in life. 

He will not know and he has had an honourable retirement. Why is living out his days in a 4 acre field better? I would rather see a good looking 9 year old put down than watch home get creaky and have him until he is 29. It must be boring for him seeing his friends go out. In fact I know it is when the trailer leaves for hunting he has a massive strop! In the wild a predator may have got him as his legs would not stand 20 miles a day. He would have more than 4 acres to roam and a whole herd.

I believe I have done the best for him and me. I am not sorry or ashamed but proud that I can make the decision on my own terms.

Thank you


----------



## Theocat (18 August 2016)

piglet2001 said:



			Thank you goldenstar

I love him dearly. But 20 years is a long time for a young horse who I am not ashamed to say that I bought to do a job (to hunt) before ultimately selling him.

Some would have unscrupulously sold him I am sure as he would pass a 2 stage but not withstand any work.

Instead I loved him, had him insured luckily, tried barefoot (he still is) along with regular physio etc. I am going to say good bye due to him having no job, I could keep him financially - but why? I feel I have given him a lovely last few years with plenty of food, nice friends and 24/7 turnout. I felt I owed it to him after he had a horrid start in life. 

He will not know and he has had an honourable retirement. Why is living out his days in a 4 acre field better? I would rather see a good looking 9 year old put down than watch home get creaky and have him until he is 29. It must be boring for him seeing his friends go out. In fact I know it is when the trailer leaves for hunting he has a massive strop! In the wild a predator may have got him as his legs would not stand 20 miles a day. He would have more than 4 acres to roam and a whole herd.

I believe I have done the best for him and me. I am not sorry or ashamed but proud that I can make the decision on my own terms.

Thank you
		
Click to expand...

You should be very proud x


----------



## Dave's Mam (18 August 2016)

piglet2001 said:



			Thank you goldenstar

I love him dearly. But 20 years is a long time for a young horse who I am not ashamed to say that I bought to do a job (to hunt) before ultimately selling him.

Some would have unscrupulously sold him I am sure as he would pass a 2 stage but not withstand any work.

Instead I loved him, had him insured luckily, tried barefoot (he still is) along with regular physio etc. I am going to say good bye due to him having no job, I could keep him financially - but why? I feel I have given him a lovely last few years with plenty of food, nice friends and 24/7 turnout. I felt I owed it to him after he had a horrid start in life. 

He will not know and he has had an honourable retirement. Why is living out his days in a 4 acre field better? I would rather see a good looking 9 year old put down than watch home get creaky and have him until he is 29. It must be boring for him seeing his friends go out. In fact I know it is when the trailer leaves for hunting he has a massive strop! In the wild a predator may have got him as his legs would not stand 20 miles a day. He would have more than 4 acres to roam and a whole herd.

I believe I have done the best for him and me. I am not sorry or ashamed but proud that I can make the decision on my own terms.

Thank you
		
Click to expand...

You have made a brave & kind decision & I also believe you love your horse.  Beyond a shadow of a doubt.


----------



## Theocat (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			So it is a financial decision. Why would I think that is unkind or unloving? If you cannot afford to keep him for 20 years I don't think that is unloving.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry; you aren't being clear.  Exactly which type of financial decision does it have to be before it means we do love the horse?

We suddenly lose all our income and savings coincidentally when the horse has to be retired?

We're unable to actually find the money, despite every effort, to cover big vet bills?

We balk at the idea of paying out, potentially, £120,000 to keep it? (That's five hundred quid a month for twenty years) Remember, we get to okay it over time which makes it "affordable".

Or are you actually just saying that those for whom money really is no object, who get rid of the horse the second it ceases work, are the only ones you're referring to?

The vast majority of those choosing to put an animal down before it becomes necessary are making a financial decision of one kind of another. You can't possibly draw a line through such a grey area and dictate which people love their horse and which don't.


----------



## Mongoose11 (18 August 2016)

Theocat said:



			I'm sorry; you aren't being clear.  Exactly which type of financial decision does it have to be before it means we do love the horse?

We suddenly lose all our income and savings coincidentally when the horse has to be retired?

We're unable to actually find the money, despite every effort, to cover big vet bills?

We balk at the idea of paying out, potentially, £120,000 to keep it? (That's five hundred quid a month for twenty years) Remember, we get to okay it over time which makes it "affordable".

Or are you actually just saying that those for whom money really is no object, who get rid of the horse the second it ceases work, are the only ones you're referring to?

The vast majority of those choosing to put an animal down before it becomes necessary are making a financial decision of one kind of another. You can't possibly draw a line through such a grey area and dictate which people love their horse and which don't.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent post. Perhaps OP could produce a more detailed contract of care by which we could gauge our feelings for our horses.


----------



## Theocat (18 August 2016)

Evie91 said:



			Not sure about the cycling analogy either, if my husband could not do all he does now, would I still love him, yes absolutely!
		
Click to expand...

Sadly, though, lots of relationships do break down because if this sort of change - but you posted a very balanced comment


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (18 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			No one is condemning anyone for putting a horse to sleep when it can no longer work. I just get irritated when the same people say they love the horse. They do not. That is not to say that they cannot love a horse. They just obviously haven't owned it yet.
		
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this. A lot of horses enjoy their work and when they no longer are able to, there are all sorts of reasons why PTS may be an option, for e.g. they may be very unhappy not being in regular work and getting increasingly distressed at no longer having the regularity of routine that they once had; the owner may not be realistically be able to give them the specialist care they need; or pure and simple they may not be able to afford the luxury of keeping a horse as a field ornament. 

There are a great deal more terrible things that can happen to a horse that can no longer do its job, than being PTS. The saddest adverts that one sees are horses advertised in H&H and FB, and elsewhere, where horses/ponies have obviously done a job well but can no longer do it so effectively - they are then advertised as "companions" or "can do light work" - and everyone knows that these unfortunate animals will end up shunted from pillar to post, to seedy dealers, to market, and then the meat man. Far kinder to make a decision to PTS rather than do this to a horse surely?


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

I have had a lot of horses nearly fifty I should think .
I do like/ love some more than others we had one I can honestly say I disliked but he suited MrGS perfectly .
I can honestly say hand on heart I treated all of them the same in the end of life decision wether they were an extra special one like GS and her wonderful mum or the one of mrgs's that I did not like .
In fact I nursed that one for six months of box rest at one point .
Horses dont care if we love them it's irrelevant for them it's the care they receive they value and the fairness with which they are handled and trained .


----------



## honetpot (18 August 2016)

What has love got to do with it?
We should have care and compassion for our animals, and people how ever long they live, love has nothing to do with it.
Love has been an excuse for abuse,' I have hit you,starved you, kept you in pain because I love you so much and can't bare to lose you
' 
So you love your animal and will not let it go even though you can not afford to maintain its or your children's needs? The horse does not know it is loved, it needs it basic needs filled and allowed to be a horse. I give care to all my charges animaI and human do not have to love them to do that, in fact the less I like them the harder I try
 I have a disposal able horse, she is an old broodmare, this will be her last home. You can not catch her,stroke her, she is happiest away from people the day she is shot will perhaps be a relief for her. You do not have to love to give good care.
Love has nothing to do with caring or owning  for animals, everyone s idea of love is different, care and compassion should be the standard.


----------



## Dave's Mam (18 August 2016)

honetpot said:



			What has love got to do with it?
We should have care and compassion for our animals, and people how ever long they live, love has nothing to do with it.
Love has been an excuse for abuse,' I have hit you,starved you, kept you in pain because I love you so much and can't bare to lose you
' 
So you love your animal and will not let it go even though you can not afford to maintain its or your children's needs? The horse does not know it is loved, it needs it basic needs filled and allowed to be a horse. I give care to all my charges animaI and human do not have to love them to do that, in fact the less I like them the harder I try
 I have a disposal able horse, she is an old broodmare, this will be her last home. You can not catch her,stroke her, she is happiest away from people the day she is shot will perhaps be a relief for her. You do not have to love to give good care.
Love has nothing to do with caring or owning  for animals, everyone s idea of love is different, care and compassion should be the standard.
		
Click to expand...

Bingo.  Well said.


----------



## Goldenstar (18 August 2016)

Mongoose11 said:



			Excellent post. Perhaps OP could produce a more detailed contract of care by which we could gauge our feelings for our horses.
		
Click to expand...

And what degree of finciancial hardship makes it ok to PTS .
Is not being able to have a new car a holiday and do up the bathroom or do the children have to going through bins for snacks before its ok .


----------



## EmmaB (18 August 2016)

I don't really understand the point of this thread. I'd say there a very very few people who would just casually say 'eh shoot that one and get another' with no valid reason and then also claim to love the horse so much. 

If a horse is ending it's ridden career there is usually a reason - old age, injury - so if your horse is pts with those reasons it's ok to say you love it then? I don't know anyone who would randomly retire their horse for no reason and have it shot?! 

The type of person this thread is aimed at is a tiny minority of horse owners so it feels like this was posted purely to upset people.


----------



## oldie48 (18 August 2016)

Totally agree. It's not about love it's about being responsible. I never thought twice about how much I "loved" a horse when it came to it's care, I did what I felt was right and I would do the same when it came to it's end.



Goldenstar said:



			I have had a lot of horses nearly fifty I should think .
I do like/ love some more than others we had one I can honestly say I disliked but he suited MrGS perfectly .
I can honestly say hand on heart I treated all of them the same in the end of life decision wether they were an extra special one like GS and her wonderful mum or the one of mrgs's that I did not like .
In fact I nursed that one for six months of box rest at one point .
Horses dont care if we love them it's irrelevant for them it's the care they receive they value and the fairness with which they are handled and trained .
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Alec Swan (18 August 2016)

^^^^ and amongst others,  it took a while,  but common sense and reason seem to be filtering through.

Alec.


----------



## twiggy2 (18 August 2016)

I am another Obe who does not believe love has anything to do with the level of care animals receive. 
I would not keep a horse alive if I could not provide what I believe that horse needs in order to meet its basic needs.
I also would no entrust the long term care of my horse to someone who is making a profit by providing that care. I work in the industry and I honestly feel my horse has her basic needs and then some met.
I don't believe retiring a horse is in the horses best interest unless they can free roam a large average with a stable herd of other retired horses with a routine of care that they all receive.
So yes if mine had to retire I would call it time and she would be shot, i don't however feel that I love her but I see lots of animals who suffer because their owners are blinded by love and cannot face losing them.
Better amount too soon rather than a day too late.


----------



## FfionWinnie (18 August 2016)

How would you feel wagtail if someone started a thread and said anyone who kept a horse going for a long time while it was repeatedly suffering from laminitis and couldn't eat grass and couldn't eat hay and was on a highly restricted diet and so on and so on, couldn't have loved their horse? 

Personally, I would prefer to sell on to a quieter life before it got to the PTS stage. A couple of mine will live on as big expensive hairy pets here, no doubt but I, like you, have my own place. Many people aren't lucky enough to have their own place and I am sorry but keeping a horse for perhaps twenty years as a big expensive pet on livery doesn't mean you love it any more than someone who decides to call it a day.


----------



## charlie76 (18 August 2016)

This post is very judgemental, who are we to say how much anyone loves their horse. 
I'm in the fortunate situation that  I have my own yard with good grazing so should any of my horses become unridable then as long as they are happy and sound they can be turned out and retired, to be honest, they could still live how they do now minus the riding.

However, I have many people on my yard who go without to have horses that they have to ride, they are not in a financial situation to have a horse as a pet, as let's face it , they are NOT pets. 

I know that should any of these animals have an issue that deemed them unridable, chances are they would have them put to sleep to enable them to have a horse to do what they enjoy.... Riding!

Just because  they would chose this it doesn't mean they don't love their horse ant less than you do wagtail. I see these people with them every day and they adore them but people have to be realistic, not everyone has the time, money, inclination to collect horses they can't ride.


----------



## Regandal (18 August 2016)

I'm another who's confused as to why this has been posted.  You're preaching to the choir here, don't think the type who shoot them on a whim frequent this place much.


----------



## ycbm (18 August 2016)

. Many people aren't lucky enough to have their own place and I am sorry but keeping a horse for perhaps twenty years as a big expensive pet on livery doesn't mean you love it any more than someone who decides to call it a day.
		
Click to expand...


Perhaps love is too emotive a word, I don't know. But if you have two people, with identical horses, and one retires the horse and keeps it for twenty years unridden, and the other has it put down and replaces it with a horse which can be ridden, how do we describe the difference?

I'm not being judgemental about this in any way. I'm in the group which would put the horse down. I'm also happy to accept that the people who wouldn't PTS  'love' the horse (as in, have a stronger emotional attachment to it)  than I do.


----------



## Equi (18 August 2016)

Presumably horses finish riding because they have some sort of issue. Many deteriorate and are left in pain. Many are sold on to quieter homes which end up running them to the ground. 

We all know putting a healthy animal to sleep is not the worst fate it can have.


----------



## ester (18 August 2016)

Have we defined love yet? Given that is entire construct based on emotions I don't understand a definition would be very helpful . Though it would certainly be a mistake to assume everyone feels this mysterious thing the same. 
IME most people try and do the best for their horses, others might not agree but that disagreement doesn't mean they don't love them, it might well be that 'love' is different for different people.
On the basis that I don't know what love is I need Frank more than I have ever needed anyone else in my life, to the point that if he goes I will have questions over my own existence and ability to cope but I don't think that would be deemed a terribly healthy situation to be in either , and I still wouldn't be sure it was love .


----------



## Equi (18 August 2016)

I define love as that "squeeee" feeling you get when you think or see said person/animal.


----------



## planete (18 August 2016)

I was going to comment but everything I could say has been said.  Perhaps wagtail should go and examine her reasons for starting this thread?  She seems very unaware of the consequences of her arbitrary pronouncements and probably of her own motives.


----------



## MargotC (18 August 2016)

I think this thread does well to bring up the fact that if you take on responsibility for a horse you also take on the responsibility to determine how it will exit your care; even if you do not want to face that fact.

Those who frequent this forum will have encountered the dilemma but to many their first experience with it is when they are themselves in that situation where they have to determine it. Perhaps threads such as this can help someone to figure out their stance on the subject and prepare them for the realities and potential downsides of horse ownership.

It also drives home the point that regardless of how and when each and every one of us chooses to let their horse go, a horse is a living animal and not something to be disposed of lightly and at a whim. Taking on responsibility for a horse is to take on that responsibility and carry it well up until the end.


----------



## rowan666 (18 August 2016)

Antw23uk said:



			Yes you are!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely not!!! I have had to PTS two of my horses in the last two years, both of which were very much loved but in the interest of welfare (both had many health issues) they were PTS and it tore me apart but I did it because I loved them, it would have been plain selfish to keep them going! I also would not condem those that PTS for financial reasons (particularly if horse is quirky and would be difficult to rehome) but I don't think you can truely love a horse if you PTS PURELY because it no longer serves a purpose, it does NOT in anyway mean a horse has not been well cared for just that if you truely LOVE a horse you would go without competing/riding/showing to keep it if it lost it's "use". If you loved your partner would you leave them just because they became incapacitated!? NO. Of all my current 4 horses I only truely love one (I obviously care for them all and treat them equally) and I would never dream of having him PTS because he can no longer jump or show, I would sell my ridable mare (who is absolutely perfect for me) and my kids ponies before I would part with him if it came to it. I love him, I will always do my best for him even when he's old and can't even be hacked out, he will always have a home and PTS will never be an option as long as his health allows


----------



## Nappy Croc (18 August 2016)

I loved my old pony enough that when his career was over I chose for him to have a dignified end after a short retirement. We have more than enough land to have ponies on retirement (have 2 others long term retired and at the time had 3) and there was no financial constraints (within reason obviously but that wasn't a factor). It also didn't free up space/time to get another. Keeping him indefinitely would not have been a kind thing to do, and as much as I loved him I still had clarity of thought to 'see' it from his perspective and have him out down aged 11. What ever was best for that pony he would have got, and ultimately did I guess! I loved him and still miss him now. Once my dog stopped being able to live free of distress he was also put down.


----------



## YorksG (18 August 2016)

I find questioning other people's statements about their own emotional state fairly pointless tbh. It is not a welfare issue imo, therefore nobody's business but the horses owners. I don't quite understand why the OP is concerned about what others say about their own horses. I have heard people say that they love cream cakes, but they eat them rather than save them to love  As I recall, the ancient Greeks had many different words for love, as they understood that there are many shades and varieties of that particular emotion.


----------



## ribbons (18 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			I wish people would love their horses less and take care of them more. IME it is the animal lovers who tend to keep their horses (and other animals) going far, far longer than is kind or reasonable, because they "love them too much to kill them".
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely, completely, 100% agree


----------



## monkeymad (18 August 2016)

I am with ycbm, my outlook on life for all living souls is quality not quantity.  I am very fond of my horses but I don't love them.  I would not see them suffer.  I have never sold a horse, some I have retired and some I have had PTS when they can no longer be ridden.  My dogs I love, I would re-mortgage my house to fund treatment for them if necessary.  I would not financially destroy myself for my horses.


----------



## Doormouse (18 August 2016)

How dare you presume to know how people feel about their horses.

4 years ago I was a given a retired racehorse. The most charming horse I have ever met ( and I've met a few in my life) who is a wonderful ride, a true gentleman in every sense of the word and whom next week I will pts. As I write this my throat is closing and tears are prickling my eyes, I love the very bones of him, he is part of the family and it is for that very reason that I will go ahead, despite every inch of my heart screaming no and have him shot.

When he arrived with me he was thin, frightened and terribly sad. I fed him, loved him, nursed him and tried for a year to rehabilitate him to compete but he simply couldn't cope with any pressure. As soon as I realised that I was making him unhappy asking him to do this, I turned him out with a herd to run over 20 acres thinking that may help him. He hated every minute of it, felt abandoned and afraid. I brought him home and he became the nanny, he led my daughter on her pony, he hacked out with the youngster to give her confidence. He became a huge character, the yard clown, incredibly gentle with my then 3 year daughter, allowing her to lead him in and out of the field, to wash him, brush him and play hide and seek in his manger.

He hates the winter, we coaxed him through last winter with a lot of food and supplements, he has stiff joints and at 16 shows the fruits of a hard life. He won £300,000 in his racing career, won a Grade 1 hurdle and 2 Grade 2's, was ridden and won for AP McCoy, Ruby Walsh, Paul Carberry to name but a few. He owes the human race nothing, he has run until his heart was broken, I inherited the pieces.

In 4 years I have given him as much confidence as I was able, all the love in the world and in return he has been kind, loving and immensely generous. Last week he wasn't ridden as the hunter has come back into work who is now leading the pony and I was busy and just exercised the ones that had to be. He was distraught and hid at the back of his stable. I rode him today and he was delighted and begging for apples over his door again. 

Next week I will give him a dignified end, whilst he is still well and happy and I will guarantee that no one will ever be able to hurt or frighten him again. I owe him that, it will tear me apart to do it but I will not see him left on the side lines because his body is failing and he can no longer be part of things as he wants to be.

Don't you dare presume that I don't love this horse, it is my love for him that will keep me from faltering next week and my love for him will set him free from anymore pain, ever.


----------



## Irish gal (18 August 2016)

This is actually a bit of a philosophical question really and a lot depends on the person's background. For instance farmers will send an injured horse to the factory, so they have the payment, where others will have pts. Although those same farmers would not say they "loved" the horse - that emotion is reserved for family.

I know what you're saying Wagtail and I would feel as you do about my horses. But then I feel hypocritical. I eat meat, I'll bet I could feel attachment to cattle if I had them and worked with them enough, yet we think nothing of disposing of them. Which is where I think the farmers get the attitude from, that allows them to factory a horse without a moments thought.

Another point though: retirement liveries are not expensive, there's a fab woman in Cornwall with loads of acres to roam, she really looks after them and it's £25 a week. When you consider that many spend hundreds a month on livery this is a very affordable option for people.

For a couple of years I had a grass livery ( non ridden) with  some retirees. In fairness it was horse utopia, we opened out the gates on a 100 acre farm and there was one big herd. They absolutely loved it. And I never met a horse who did not adjust to being in the herd. Think about it - it's their natural state. No matter how competitive the horse, they blimmin loved reverting to the herd. A lovely lady send me a 24 yr-old pony who had jumped for Finland and Ireland, and she had the most brilliant retirement just pottering and being in the herd.

All I would say is for anyone wondering would their horse "cope" or be happy non ridden - yes they would, in the right setting. it's their natural state after all. They don't need us, they have plenty going on with their herd dynamics and deciding where to graze. At the time I was tempted to get a tee shirt printed inspired by the lead mare. It would read - Humans are For Losers. That was the level of interest they had in people. Still it was a pure privilege just to spend time with them, and either hear or watch them take off galloping from one end of the farm to the other. I'm rambling now so I'll leave it there. This is a very big question and somehow I don't think it will be solved here


----------



## redredruby (18 August 2016)

Theocat said:



			For those who love the horse but send it away to retirement livery or a blood bank - I don't have a problem with that, and it's certainly none of my business.  But fundamentally, what's in it for the horse?  Why is a longer life better than a short one?  And what is the owner getting out of it?  If they love the horse (more than those ghastly ones amongst us who would put down instead) how can they bear to be parted from it?  I can't see that keeping a horse alive and sending it away shows any more love than having it put down.
		
Click to expand...

I retired my horse when he could no longer be ridden at a level that both he and I enjoyed (he would never be a quiet hack). He is now at a retirement livery yard and I see him approximately 4 times a year. He is field sound enjoying his last few years without having any demands on him. I sent him away because there wasn't anywhere local with the facilities he needed. I would have much preferred to have kept him at home with me, but had to do what was right for him.

I can bear to be parted from him because I am putting his interests first. I could have kept him and seen him everyday but that wouldn't have been the best thing for him. When I do visit and see that he still has the cheeky sparkle in his eye I know, despite the financial sacrifice, I've done the right thing.

Horses don't exist simply to serve us, and when they have given us 20 years or so, surely a (if healthy) retirement is a small thank you. 

Of course, I would far rather a horse was PTS than simply given away or sold on when it was no longer useful - people who do that really are appalling.


----------



## Irish gal (18 August 2016)

Doormouse, I just want to say - fair play to you. That is as sad a story as I have ever heard. The poor old horse, I do often wonder if racing isn't cruel, with all the crazy pressure those animals are under. You have done your very best for him and he knows that. I'm sure he'll be forever indebted to you.


----------



## wingedhorse99 (18 August 2016)

It's not always that simple. I've an 18 year old 17hh horse with history weak SI, he's still in full work but not really competing but for fun. He needs a lot of gymnastic work, bodywork, careful management. He must hack as well as school as history soft tissue damage. He's hard work and costly. But he's worth it. He's my horse of a lifetime. 

BUT I've rehabbed the SI 3 times, and there won't be a fourth time. Last time took 9 months. It's not fair on either of us. IMO he won't retire either as I don't think him losing strength or power is fair. We will see but my feeling is I'll try and keep him going as long as feels right. But PTS before he knows fear / weakness / dropping to bottom herd hierarchy.

I have a second riding horse. I will probably put above horse down not long after I stop riding him. 

And if anybody DARES believe I don't love the bones of my older horse. I love him and **I** with the advice of the professionals that support us will make the best decision for him. It's no one else's business. I'm the one that needs to look my horse in the eye.


----------



## Micropony (18 August 2016)

Doormouse I shed a tear at your post. So sorry you are going through that, and I hope your horse's last day is a happy one.

Wagtail, I am not at all sure what you were hoping to achieve with this thread and can only give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you failed to realise how upsetting and offensive it would be to many people, for some of whom you will by now surely have realised PTS is very much a current or a very raw issue, and your post has been, shall we say, unhelpful.

Just under two years ago I had my much loved first horse PTS. It was not because he could no longer be ridden, but because it was the humane thing to do for him. However much I know I did the right thing for him, I can't help but wonder whether there might have been someone like you who didn't know all the circumstamces judging my decision and feeling smug and superior. Other people's opinions on those things don't generally matter very much to me, but we're all a lot more sensitive when we are at such a low ebb.

Whilst you have been clear you agrer the question of "love" has scant relevance to quality of care, on this thread you come across to me as smug, superior, extremely judgemental and really very unkind. That's not an impression I have gained from other posts of yours that I have read, so will just assume you are having a very bad day indeed.


----------



## Dave's Mam (18 August 2016)

Wagtail, I hope the responses you have prompted & many sad memories will perhaps put your perception on a more even keel.


----------



## SatansLittleHelper (19 August 2016)

I used to be more sentimental about horses etc but then I had to stand in resus and make the decision to allow my 6 year old daughter to die. I love my animals to the moon and back but believe me I would not struggle with any decision now regarding PTS...for ANY reason.


----------



## Enfys (19 August 2016)

I had my horse pts because he was no longer rideable, and I don't, and didn't, give a stuff what anyone else thinks, or thought.  

My horse, my business. 

I didn't discuss my decision with all and sundry, I never feel the need to justify myself, I didn't ask their permission, I didn't need it, or their blessing. 

As for the love thing, I am actually not sure what that is when it comes to animals, at all really,  how do you quantify it? 

Maybe I just think love should be more than it actually is, that each of us see it differently, a little like someone saying Niagara Falls are awesome -

 " What are you ON ? Really? Awesome ? " 

to me they aren't, I've seen them every which way, from two countries, and in the middle, more times than I would ever want to, they are not even vaguely impressive as far as I am concerned, but I have stood there, at the rails, in the bloody spray, and listened to the oohs and the ahhhs in umpteen different languages thinking 'are you guys for real?'  

See what I mean?  

We don't all fit certain parameters.


----------



## Fairynuff (19 August 2016)

SpringArising said:



			Wagtail that's a rubbish analogy. A dog costs a tenth of the price of a horse.
		
Click to expand...

Plus a dog can happily spend time mooching around in the house/garden and is more than happy to curl up on your bed. You cannot compare horses with dogs. Utterly ridiculous. Methinks Wagtail is now trying to water down her crassness


----------



## Shantara (19 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			I wish people would love their horses less and take care of them more. IME it is the animal lovers who tend to keep their horses (and other animals) going far, far longer than is kind or reasonable, because they "love them too much to kill them".
		
Click to expand...

There's a whole lor of tarring with that same ol' brush going on in this thread!!
I love my Neddy more than most things. Not more than my family of course, but it's not far off. I loved my gorgeous little dog more than most other things too, but I knew we PTS at the right time with her. A week sooner and it would have been pointless, she was a happy dog! A week later and it would have been unfair, she might have been in bad pain. We did the deed just as she started to show signs of discomfort and the vet said it'd just get worse and it would get worse quickly.

I do consider myself a fluffybunny (GASP!) because I care a vast amount about my animals, they are living creatures and have feelings and emotions. However, it's ALSO wrong to suggest that I will let them suffer because of that! 

I think there should be a little less judgement and sweeping statements! If Wagtail is rediculous for saying you don't love your horses enough, then you're rediculous for suggesting we'll harm our animals by loving too much!


----------



## DD (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden. 

We all have different views, and it is true that the horse doesn't know it is going to be PTS because when it's dead, it's dead and so long as it is done well, then it is none the wiser. It does not suffer. If the owner has also taken care of it well throughout ownership, then they are a good owner from the horse's point of view. But please, people who state that they will PTS as soon as the horse cannot do its job, even if it is very happy and comfortable not being ridden, you do not love the horse. You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.

Now, I am not for one second condemning people who do this. Not one bit. I am just saying that they do not love their horse and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.
		
Click to expand...

^^^^^
couldnt agree more, very good post.


----------



## cattysmith (19 August 2016)

SatansLittleHelper said:



			I used to be more sentimental about horses etc but then I had to stand in resus and make the decision to allow my 6 year old daughter to die. I love my animals to the moon and back but believe me I would not struggle with any decision now regarding PTS...for ANY reason.
		
Click to expand...

That's just devastating beyond comprehension. The worst thing anyone could go through. Suffering personal tragedies like that definitely does put everything else into different perspective.


----------



## Brownmare (19 August 2016)

Cortez said:



			I wish people would love their horses less and take care of them more. IME it is the animal lovers who tend to keep their horses (and other animals) going far, far longer than is kind or reasonable, because they "love them too much to kill them".
		
Click to expand...

This ^^^^  in  spades


----------



## Merlod (19 August 2016)

I absolutely agree with wagtail. I think some people are either taking it the wrong way (nothing wrong with pts for health) or are in denial as many people seem to act like it was their only option even when it was a horse who could have been happily field sound, again, as wagtail said, there is absolutely no problem in putting a horse down (and I am for it to stop old/injured horses being passed around) but I do find it a little insulting to say you love your horse as much as the people who keep their old/retired/field sound horses alive and happy even at the expense of the fun stuff or having a riding horse.

 My little sister has a 13.2 connemara, he went dead lame and ended up having to have an annular ligament desmotomy where they also found a damage to the manica flexoria, he had the op. we did all the rehab but he never came sound enough to ride. She was gutted and even when my (non horsey) dad said to &#8220;let him go&#8221; and she could get a new one she refused, he is her dear friend and a part of our family, he taught her to ride and we owe him a retirement and when the times comes a dignified end. I do feel for her, as we can&#8217;t afford two ponies for her but she has made the decision to keep her old friend even whilst all her friends and girls her age are out competing and moving on to horses. Now that is someone who loves their horse and I am very proud as I would do exactly the same.


----------



## luckyoldme (19 August 2016)

A lot of the replies on here aren t really relevant.most examples given are horses who were pts for good reason.
I should imagine there are very few of us who would keep an old ,lame and unhappy horse going.
I think the real difference is that some of us just could nt imagine for  a moment being able to go to the field putting a head collar on a perfectly healthy , happy and content horse bringing it in and having it pts, having owned and loved it for a long time.
Personally i just could nt deal with the emotions of that. I know other people can but i cant. It does nt mean im going to keep my old boy until he is hobbling round the field and unhappy. In fact Im glad i don t have to watch him suffer like we have to watch our old human loved ones suffer.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

But several including wagtail have now also added that there is nothing wrong with PTS for financial reasons..

Now I am not sure what those financial reasons have to be to make it ok, absolute skintness? Wanting to save the ££ that you were spending on the horse so you might finally be able to buy a house? Because when you bought the horse you decided it was never going to happen so you would just enjoy life instead.  Losing your job or not being able to work?

Is the sheer fact that as has been pointed out earlier that if you horse is going to have potentially 20, even 10 years of retirement, spending several hundred pounds a month adds up to a huge amount of money that you are then going to deny your family of? 

I'm not sure what I think about it, other than I think everyone and every situation is different so I wouldn't judge. People may love them just as much as those that keep horses for 20 years retired but they may have had to make a very hard decision for other reasons beyond their control.


----------



## mytwofriends (19 August 2016)

milliepops said:



			Agree. 
TBH I wouldn't presume to tell anyone how they feel about their horse when they are facing retirement, nor to question their decisions provided the horse wasn't suffering. None of my business.
		
Click to expand...

This ^^^

There's something about some horse folk which I find very unappealing, and that is their unwavering opinions. No-one else's have any bearing. Black or white, no grey area, no compromise. 

In MY humble opinion, so long as a horse isn't suffering, or may face suffering due to an unknown future, whether an owner loves it or not is completely irrelevant to anyone but the owner themself.


----------



## oldie48 (19 August 2016)

Oh dear, I now know I don't love my adorable husband of 30 years, I haven't felt a squeeee for a very long time! I've had the old TB for a very long time, when he was ridden I often thought he was a bit of a b......r, he's been retired for several years now and I probably feel more genuine affection for him now than I did when he was a younger active horse and he's much more affectionate towards me. I am lucky that I can give him a retirement and he has a job, being BFF to Mr B. I never feel a squeeee for him though!



equi said:



			I define love as that "squeeee" feeling you get when you think or see said person/animal.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Thank you to those who have constructively replied to this thread and understood the point I was trying to make. I did try to quote you all but then lost the reply. 

And those who have told their stories on here about the very sad call they have had to make; not one of you falls into the situation I am talking about. Not one.

The thread is not about what is right or wrong, but about the flippant way someone can say that they love their horse when in the same breath they have said that it will be PTS as soon as it can't work. There are, of course some very valid reasons for this, for example if the horse for whatever reason could not comfortably or happily retire. Only the owner knows this and I make no judgement on that. I am not saying this is wrong. Also, as I have previously said, some horses just get to you more than others and the same owner would not necessarily take the same action on the same decision with every one of them. 

For those who say this thread is a troll post or just meant to upset people, how could it do that unless you are a person who intends to shoot their horse in order to get a new one but who also says they love the horse? And as someone says, these people are a very small minority.

Then there are the usual haters who just see any of my threads and jump in purposely misinterpreting what I have said and deflecting the thread, and making personal insults. I stopped engaging with you individually a long time ago. You know who you are. Contrary to what you say, you sit and wait for these threads (God knows where you find the time). You love my threads, so get over yourselves.

The thread was a reaction to what someone said on this forum. I have seen it said before and I just thought, no, you do not love your horse. I am surprised, if I am 'preaching to the choir' why so many people are objecting to this thread. It is not aimed at people who have to make that call and the horse is in pain, or they cannot afford to keep the horse in retirement, or the horse just would not settle in retirement (though these are rare horses). It is aimed at people who view their horses as riding machines who will shoot it when it is no longer of use even though they can afford to keep it when it is able to carry them AND in the same breath say they love the horse. They don't; they love RIDING the horse.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

Sacimonious in the extreme .


----------



## touchstone (19 August 2016)

I live near someone who takes great pride in letting everyone know how much they love their horse, unfortunately this has turned into anthropomorphism  and the owners are completely unaware of the horses preferences. It has to stand while grown adults hug it's neck and kiss it's nose while it is obviously irritated by the whole thing.  It is stabled at the slightest drop of rain which it hates and box walks.  It is taken for long outings and galloped when totally unfit because it enjoys it.   I'm pretty sure that it will have to continue into old age even if it has a myriad of ailments as they love it so much.
What they are confusing is love with selfishness and self gratification, because they've fussed incessantly over the horse they feel good about themselves, the horse couldn't give two hoots and would probably prefer to be given some peace, so II do think that sometimes distancing ourselves from the emotional side and really looking at what is best for them is a totally different kettle of fish to what some would describe as love.
Care and compassion have to be priority as others have said.  Somebody who humanely ends a horses life shouldn't be judged, there are fates far worse and only the owner is in a position to decide if the choice is right without us saying they don't love their horse.


----------



## Stockers (19 August 2016)

I have a horse because I love riding. I am not Lady-Manyacres.  I cannot justify keeping a horse at livery that I cannot ride.  My horse is 11 years old and thrives on work.  He wouldn;t happily retire out at grass. I think it's clear what I would do.  Do I love him?  I absolutely adore him and would do right by him when the time comes, as I have with other horses. 

No one can tell me I don't love my horse becasuse of any decision I may make in the above circumstances and quite frankly they should look to their own busines before making sweeping judgements of others.


----------



## peaceandquiet1 (19 August 2016)

I know someone who "loves" her horses. She barely lets them out, they have a strict and boring routine, they are over rugged and molly coddled and they bite and shove because she feeds titbits all the time. Love is very hard to define as it can be a selfish thing. So it all depends on how you define love.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

But the 'being able to afford' bit is the complication is it not?
Because for most, the not being able to afford means choosing to spend your money on something else? Because your priorities and family commitments might have changed over the years. You might be up for living on beans on toast but your husband and kids might be less keen. 
As I said it is all so subjective and very judgemental and presumptive on people's feelings.


----------



## Merlod (19 August 2016)

Im not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as its riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldnt be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)

2)People who keep their horses going even when its past their time and they are struggling with life (because they love them too much and just let the horse suffer on even when it can't get up anymore etc)

And then there are the normal varieties of these;

1)People who PTS because their horse is struggling or they cant afford to keep it and they dont want it passed from pillar to post.

2)People who retire their horses because they ARE field sound and still understand the horse will be PTS when the time comes.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Merlod said:



			I&#8217;m not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as it&#8217;s riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldn&#8217;t be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)

2)People who keep their horses going even when it&#8217;s past their time and they are struggling with life (because they &#8220;love&#8221; them too much and just let the horse suffer on even when it can't get up anymore etc)

And then there are the &#8220;normal&#8221; varieties of these;

1)People who PTS because their horse is struggling or they can&#8217;t afford to keep it and they don&#8217;t want it passed from pillar to post.

2)People who retire their horses because they ARE field sound and still understand the horse will be PTS when the time comes.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly. Put much more clearly than I did.


----------



## Mongoose11 (19 August 2016)

And yet, I've only ever met one person who is as OP describes but plenty who let the horse carry on in pain, unable to live as a horse should because the owner can't let them go. I can only presume therefore that the thread was designed to cause upset rather than attempt to address the absolute minority who actually take the course of action she describes. From my reading only one person here would/has taken the action she described so who is OP attempting to communicate with? 

Hypocrisy is rife!


----------



## ljohnsonsj (19 August 2016)

Merlod said:



			I&#8217;m not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as it&#8217;s riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldn&#8217;t be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)

2)People who keep their horses going even when it&#8217;s past their time and they are struggling with life (because they &#8220;love&#8221; them too much and just let the horse suffer on even when it can't get up anymore etc)

And then there are the &#8220;normal&#8221; varieties of these;

1)People who PTS because their horse is struggling or they can&#8217;t afford to keep it and they don&#8217;t want it passed from pillar to post.

2)People who retire their horses because they ARE field sound and still understand the horse will be PTS when the time comes.
		
Click to expand...



Sorry but I can't fully agree with your statement. Some horses that do a job, and I mean properly do a job not just pop to the odd unaff really couldn't cope well with being retired. My old show jumper is now in a hacking home, but if the time comes she is 'retired' she would not be happy being in a field. She can't cope being out she is far to stressy and busy in her mind standing in a field would drive her insane. She has never been happy being out for a long period of time, be it in a group or on her own. So what is best here? Stable and turn out for a few hours a horse that would never be happy not doing a job or PTS? Because PTS would cause the horse a lot less mental strain.  As for the general statement of this post goes I don't give two hoots what people decide to do at the end of their horses ridden career and other people shouldn't either.


----------



## ihatework (19 August 2016)

Mongoose11 said:



			And yet, I've only ever met one person who is as OP describes but plenty who let the horse carry on in pain, unable to live as a horse should because the owner can't let them go. I can only presume therefore that the thread was designed to cause upset rather than attempt to address the absolute minority who actually take the course of action she describes. Not one person here would take the action she described so who is OP attempting to communicate with? 

Hypocrisy is rife!
		
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.
Other than I don't recall ever having met someone as described by the OP
However I have come across countless people who have severely compromised quality of life for their much loved horses.
I recently took that awful decision for my much loved 20yo cushings horse. He reached the point where he couldn't live like a normal horse without contracting laminitis. I was not willing to put him through months/years of confinement, dieting, lack of equine interaction. But many people do in the name of love.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Merlod said:



			I&#8217;m not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as it&#8217;s riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldn&#8217;t be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)
		
Click to expand...

It's the 'own reasons' that are the issue though aren't they, because that is what people are questioning the validity of and that they must mean you don't love the horse.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (19 August 2016)

Mongoose11, unfortunately in the last 30+ years i have been involved with horse i have seen both 1, (its broken, it wouldn't be happy in the field,  PTS and new model) and 2  (just a little bit longer) many a time. the second one is easier to explain, it is difficult to see what is in front of your eyes when you are that emotionally attached to it.  

is the first one wrong?..........everyone is different and some people show emotion differently, have a public face and at home face and the new model might actually be a way to move forward.

A couple of times when i have seen the new model break the same way as the old then you have to ask if it is a management/rider issue.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

...


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Off the top of my head I know of one who said hers wouldn't retire after a career ending injury. 
She had others in retirement and her own land so no obvious reasons not to, equally she was one of the most experienced horsewomen I know who had the horse a long time. I know she got questioned on it but I think people needed to trust that she knew her horse and it was the right decision for them, together. She didn't replace him.


----------



## ktj1891 (19 August 2016)

Okay so this thread hits a chord in me slightly. In 2010 my pony who had only just turned 8 at the time fractured her knee. Vets advised me to PTS as she would no longer be ridden and cost be money for potentially 20 years to sit in a field. I was only 18 and she was bought for me at 15 and was my first pony. Fast forward 6 years I still have her and she is now 14 and was brought back into some work in Jan 15 and now has a sharer and hacks a few times a week. 

I am now in a position where I cannot really afford her as I have another horse and paying 2 livery bills is very expensive for someone on a very average wage. What do I do, get her PTS? 1. Mainly because she costs me money which I cannot afford and 2. As she can never return to the work she used to do. I am finding myself thinking about this constantly as on the outside she is a happy healthy pony albeit cannot be 'worked' in the same way however, I already have another riding horse and she is costing me a lot of money to do nothing for me effectively. Do I not love my horse if I did put her down?

Your post seems to be aimed at a miniscule amount of people because the way I see it for me anyways...pretty much A LOT of people are contrained by the cost of keeping horses. They are a luxury and not a necessity and if you have money to keep a horse going for 20 years without in denting your pocket or way in which you live then fair enough im sure most people would do the same. 

I have kept my mare 6 years from her injury and am now starting to realise more and more the implications of the decision I made when I was 18 and the constant battle in my head now on the decision I need to make going forwards.


----------



## StarcatcherWilliam (19 August 2016)

MiJodsR2BlinkinTite said:



			There are a great deal more terrible things that can happen to a horse that can no longer do its job, than being PTS. The saddest adverts that one sees are horses advertised in H&H and FB, and elsewhere, where horses/ponies have obviously done a job well but can no longer do it so effectively - they are then advertised as "companions" or "can do light work" - and everyone knows that these unfortunate animals will end up shunted from pillar to post, to seedy dealers, to market, and then the meat man. Far kinder to make a decision to PTS rather than do this to a horse surely?
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this.


----------



## Clodagh (19 August 2016)

Actually I think most people are misunderstanding what Wagtail meant. It is a bloody stupid post, only placed to stir up trouble, as I suspect she may have known, but she does have a point. Love is keeping your horse alive if it is happy and healthy, not shooting it to suit yourself. That is all she said. So, a back handed compliment to you Wagtail.

On the other hand, someone said earlier about your mare that you loved so much you kept her alive as long as possible, which you freely admit because you loved her so much, even though she couldn't basically eat anything and couldn't walk without pain. This is not meant to be upsetting but it is the other side of the 'love' coin. 

Most of us do our best with what rescources and knowledge we have and make the decsion we deem to be best in everyones interests as and when such a decision needs to be made.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Clodagh said:



			Actually I think most people are misunderstanding what Wagtail meant. It is a bloody stupid post, only placed to stir up trouble, as I suspect she may have known, but she does have a point. Love is keeping your horse alive if it is happy and healthy, not shooting it to suit yourself. That is all she said. So, a back handed compliment to you Wagtail.

On the other hand, someone said earlier about your mare that you loved so much you kept her alive as long as possible, which you freely admit because you loved her so much, even though she couldn't basically eat anything and couldn't walk without pain. This is not meant to be upsetting but it is the other side of the 'love' coin. 

Most of us do our best with what rescources and knowledge we have and make the decsion we deem to be best in everyones interests as and when such a decision needs to be made.
		
Click to expand...

I don't really want to get into a discussion about my mare, but as you are being so polite will give you the courtesy of an answer. I can hand on heart say that I put my mare to sleep at exactly the right time. She was such a happy little mare who enjoyed life right up until the end. I had finally relented and put her in heart bar shoes and she was finally sound and happy in the field. So happy and back to her old self that she tore a tendon in her shoulder chasing a youngster round the field. It was her original career ending injury that she had done a couple of years prior to the cushings and laminitis problems and it was exactly then when I made the decision to put her to sleep because after finally getting her field sound I was not going to confine her for months in a stable. It broke my heart but I did it for her. Regarding her laminitis, she was never confined to a stable for longer than a week as I have a sand turnout where she went when she was at her worst. She had constant access to forage and never stood so much as an hour without something to munch. She was the happiest horse I have ever come across, even during her laminitis episodes. Her laminitis was mild with absolutely no rotation and she was never more than a 1/2 tenths lame during her flare-ups. 

So I think I got it exactly right with her and have no regrets other than I wish that I still had her in my life. I miss her every day. I know I did right by her 100% which is not something I can say about two of my dogs that I know I left too long in retrospect. One was due to my husband refusing to PTS whilst she was still eating (and he regrets that now) and the other was due to vets persuading us to keep going with chemo. Never again.

But what this has to do with this thread, I have no idea, so that is the end of my discussion about it.


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Then there are the usual haters who just see any of my threads and jump in purposely misinterpreting what I have said and deflecting the thread, and making personal insults. I stopped engaging with you individually a long time ago. You know who you are. Contrary to what you say, you sit and wait for these threads (God knows where you find the time). You love my threads, so get over yourselves.
		
Click to expand...

Don't flatter yourself sweetie........ having been labelled once, and only once - by posting a different opinion to yours on one of 'your' threads, i usually stay well clear.

Wagtail, my offer still stands - come and visit some FATE training or go on visits (if allowed), you might possibly then have a different perception.


----------



## spacefaer (19 August 2016)

Interesting thread.

I have an older horse who is no longer capable of doing what he has done. We don't have the facilities to retire him to a field but he is still capable of giving someone else pleasure with some hacking/low level schooling. If I found a suitable person, I would loan him to them, on the basis that his life would still have some purpose. If I don't find a suitable person, I will pts, on the basis that his quality of life would not be sufficient to continue. I am thinking of his best options - I don't want him to dwindle away, lobbed out in some muddy field - and by considering pts, I think I show more care/love/whatever you call it, for him.


----------



## Flicker (19 August 2016)

Sorry but I think that anyone presuming to know what emotion someone else is experiencing when they make a decision to put any animal to sleep is treading a very thin line.  While I don't understand why OP started the thread, I will add my 2p.  
I had my horse if a lifetime PTS a couple of years ago and can safely say that I grieved for him like I would a family member.  He could no longer 'do his job', Wagtail.  And that was the reason I had him PTS.  Not so that I could buy another one - I still don't own another horse - but because, with his other health conditions, every alternative we considered for him resulted in the same problems (in his case, intolerance to sugar in the grass and laminitis).  While he was 'doing his job' he was on limited but regular turnout to manage his metabolic condition, with loads of work to keep his mind happy.
I was offered free grazing livery for life by his old owner but we both agreed that the grazing was far too lush for him to cope with and confining him to either a grazing muzzle or starvation paddock for the next 10 years just so we didn't have to make a difficult decision was no way to thank him for his service.
I love him with that aching love that finds its way into every nerve fibre and not a day goes by that I don't think of him.  It was precisely BECAUSE I love him so much that I had him put to sleep.  The day I lost him changed me as a person.  I don't know if I am alone in that but I see myself as pre- and post- that awful, awful day.
Wagtail I read your OP and felt ill.  All those emotions came flooding back.  Sometimes your posts are really thoughtful and intelligent, but please tread carefully in areas like this.  They may just be words on a screen but their impact on thinking, feeling, grieving people is real.
I would hate to think that someone might be influenced to act in a way contrary to an animal's best interests because of an unfounded fear of being judged.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Flicker said:



			Sorry but I think that anyone presuming to know what emotion someone else is experiencing when they make a decision to put any animal to sleep is treading a very thin line.  While I don't understand why OP started the thread, I will add my 2p.  
I had my horse if a lifetime PTS a couple of years ago and can safely say that I grieved for him like I would a family member.  He could no longer 'do his job', Wagtail.  And that was the reason I had him PTS.  Not so that I could buy another one - I still don't own another horse - but because, with his other health conditions, every alternative we considered for him resulted in the same problems (in his case, intolerance to sugar in the grass and laminitis).  While he was 'doing his job' he was on limited but regular turnout to manage his metabolic condition, with loads of work to keep his mind happy.
I was offered free grazing livery for life by his old owner but we both agreed that the grazing was far too lush for him to cope with and confining him to either a grazing muzzle or starvation paddock for the next 10 years just so we didn't have to make a difficult decision was no way to thank him for his service.
I love him with that aching love that finds its way into every nerve fibre and not a day goes by that I don't think of him.  It was precisely BECAUSE I love him so much that I had him put to sleep.  The day I lost him changed me as a person.  I don't know if I am alone in that but I see myself as pre- and post- that awful, awful day.
Wagtail I read your OP and felt ill.  All those emotions came flooding back.  Sometimes your posts are really thoughtful and intelligent, but please tread carefully in areas like this.  They may just be words on a screen but their impact on thinking, feeling, grieving people is real.
I would hate to think that someone might be influenced to act in a way contrary to an animal's best interests because of an unfounded fear of being judged.
		
Click to expand...

I am really genuinely sorry that my post made you feel this way. But you made a decision that you felt was best for him. You did not just have him put to sleep because he couldn't do his job. If you thought he'd be happy retired, you would have retired him. So I don't understand why you would think my post was aimed at people like yourself. Maybe I worded it badly? 

Just as an aside, why do people think retirement has to be dumping a horse in a muddy field? I have retired three horses over the years, and none of them have been dumped in a field. They have kept the same routine as the others on the yard. Some horses are happy just out in the field, others like to follow their old routine minus the riding.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

Wagtail are you just trying to troll and wind people up? Your posts are coming across as fake and backtracking. You would be best just to leave it and chalk this up to a bad decision rather than try to wriggle out of the bind you have put yourself in.


----------



## touchstone (19 August 2016)

touchstone said:



			I live near someone who takes great pride in letting everyone know how much they love their horse, unfortunately this has turned into anthropomorphism  and the owners are completely unaware of the horses preferences. It has to stand while grown adults hug it's neck and kiss it's nose while it is obviously irritated by the whole thing.  It is stabled at the slightest drop of rain which it hates and box walks.  It is taken for long outings and galloped when totally unfit because it enjoys it.   I'm pretty sure that it will have to continue into old age even if it has a myriad of ailments as they love it so much.
What they are confusing is love with selfishness and self gratification, because they've fussed incessantly over the horse they feel good about themselves, the horse couldn't give two hoots and would probably prefer to be given some peace, so II do think that sometimes distancing ourselves from the emotional side and really looking at what is best for them is a totally different kettle of fish to what some would describe as love.
Care and compassion have to be priority as others have said.  Somebody who humanely ends a horses life shouldn't be judged, there are fates far worse and only the owner is in a position to decide if the choice is right without us saying they don't love their horse.
		
Click to expand...




Flicker said:



			Sorry but I think that anyone presuming to know what emotion someone else is experiencing when they make a decision to put any animal to sleep is treading a very thin line.  While I don't understand why OP started the thread, I will add my 2p.  
I had my horse if a lifetime PTS a couple of years ago and can safely say that I grieved for him like I would a family member.  He could no longer 'do his job', Wagtail.  And that was the reason I had him PTS.  Not so that I could buy another one - I still don't own another horse - but because, with his other health conditions, every alternative we considered for him resulted in the same problems (in his case, intolerance to sugar in the grass and laminitis).  While he was 'doing his job' he was on limited but regular turnout to manage his metabolic condition, with loads of work to keep his mind happy.
I was offered free grazing livery for life by his old owner but we both agreed that the grazing was far too lush for him to cope with and confining him to either a grazing muzzle or starvation paddock for the next 10 years just so we didn't have to make a difficult decision was no way to thank him for his service.
I love him with that aching love that finds its way into every nerve fibre and not a day goes by that I don't think of him.  It was precisely BECAUSE I love him so much that I had him put to sleep.  The day I lost him changed me as a person.  I don't know if I am alone in that but I see myself as pre- and post- that awful, awful day.
Wagtail I read your OP and felt ill.  All those emotions came flooding back.  Sometimes your posts are really thoughtful and intelligent, but please tread carefully in areas like this.  They may just be words on a screen but their impact on thinking, feeling, grieving people is real.
I would hate to think that someone might be influenced to act in a way contrary to an animal's best interests because of an unfounded fear of being judged.
		
Click to expand...



You aren't alone flicker, and have echoed my situation and sentiments exactly.  The riding aspect didn't bother me one bit, but watching her lead an increasingly restricted life was unfair on her.


----------



## SaddleUpSin (19 August 2016)

Interesting thread, sorry if someone has said the same thing, but I feel like the question that first comes to mind to me is; &#8220;If a horse can no longer do its job, WHY can it no longer do its job or any job for that matter?&#8221;  Is it in pain? Struggling to move properly? Can&#8217;t keep weight on? If I cannot comfortably retire my horse to a light hack/in hand shows/ride & lead and then to a companion/play pony for some little girl who maybe cannot afford her own to brush and fuss and learn with, then why am I keeping them hanging on to life? If a horse is happy and healthy and can, within reason, provide some sort of purpose then I would not even consider pts.  A horse that&#8217;s struggling in its old age (or heading that way) lingering around bored and unhappy I would not let drag on no matter how truly I loved them.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I am really genuinely sorry that my post made you feel this way. But you made a decision that you felt was best for him. You did not just have him put to sleep because he couldn't do his job. If you thought he'd be happy retired, you would have retired him. So I don't understand why you would think my post was aimed at people like yourself. Maybe I worded it badly?
Just as an aside, why do people think retirement has to be dumping a horse in a muddy field? I have retired three horses over the years, and none of them have been dumped in a field. They have kept the same routine as the others on the yard. Some horses are happy just out in the field, others like to follow their old routine minus the riding.
		
Click to expand...

How did you expect it to make people feel it's a bit late to be sorry .
You could have headed your thread anyway you liked but you chose that dogmatic title .
So of course it make flicker feel ill as it did me battling as I am ATM with a horse that's cost 8k since April and I can't sleep for worrying about him and trying to decide what to do next .I can't leave the house to go shopping because I keep getting called back as he has an unerring ability to start a bout as soon as I am gone .
But hey I am sure pronouncing from on high made you feel great .


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I am surprised, if I am 'preaching to the choir' why so many people are objecting to this thread. It is not aimed at people who have to make that call and the horse is in pain, *or they cannot afford to keep the horse in retirement,* or the horse just would not settle in retirement (though these are rare horses). It is aimed at people who view their horses as riding machines who will shoot it when it is no longer of use even though they can afford to keep it when it is able to carry them AND in the same breath say they love the horse. They don't; they love RIDING the horse.
		
Click to expand...




ester said:



			But the 'being able to afford' bit is the complication is it not?
Because for most, the not being able to afford means choosing to spend your money on something else? Because your priorities and family commitments might have changed over the years. You might be up for living on beans on toast but your husband and kids might be less keen. 
As I said it is all so subjective and very judgemental and presumptive on people's feelings.
		
Click to expand...

do you not agree that not being able to afford it is subjective?
Is your comment only aimed at people who immediately buy a replacement?
Is there an approved grieving period for if you do find yourself in a financial position to acquire a replacement?


----------



## Flicker (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I am really genuinely sorry that my post made you feel this way. But you made a decision that you felt was best for him. You did not just have him put to sleep because he couldn't do his job. If you thought he'd be happy retired, you would have retired him. So I don't understand why you would think my post was aimed at people like yourself. Maybe I worded it badly? 

Just as an aside, why do people think retirement has to be dumping a horse in a muddy field? I have retired three horses over the years, and none of them have been dumped in a field. They have kept the same routine as the others on the yard. Some horses are happy just out in the field, others like to follow their old routine minus the riding.
		
Click to expand...

We have horses on our livery yard who are on the 'same routine minus the riding'.  I'm not sure I'd have chosen it for my own horse.  The yard is lovely and the staff very caring but it is set up to be a yard for horses in work.  If the fields flood, for example, and everything stays in there are fab indoor facilities and a horse walker - no good for a horse with SI injuries as mine had.  So he would have to stay in and maybe get walked in hand.  Good luck with that with a spirited 16.3 ISH!  Just one example of how it wouldn't work in my situation - believe me, I considered every option!!

I'm just trying to illustrate that, by making sweeping statements, you risk forgetting that everyone's situation is unique to them.  Every decision based on a specific set of circumstances that lead you down a certain path and arrive at a unique outcome.

You seem really caring and a wonderful owner.  Recognising the shades of grey in life, though, is a strength not a weakness.  I hope I've chucked a couple in the mix for you 

I'm glad I came across your thread, and I thank those who have responded in support of me, because it confirms that I did the right thing.  Goldenstar, I'm thinking of you and I hope that you can find a way through this horrible time - big hugs to you.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you to those who have constructively replied to this thread and understood the point I was trying to make. I did try to quote you all but then lost the reply. 

And those who have told their stories on here about the very sad call they have had to make; not one of you falls into the situation I am talking about. Not one.

The thread is not about what is right or wrong, but about the flippant way someone can say that they love their horse when in the same breath they have said that it will be PTS as soon as it can't work. There are, of course some very valid reasons for this, for example if the horse for whatever reason could not comfortably or happily retire. Only the owner knows this and I make no judgement on that. I am not saying this is wrong. Also, as I have previously said, some horses just get to you more than others and the same owner would not necessarily take the same action on the same decision with every one of them. 

For those who say this thread is a troll post or just meant to upset people, how could it do that unless you are a person who intends to shoot their horse in order to get a new one but who also says they love the horse? And as someone says, these people are a very small minority.

Then there are the usual haters who just see any of my threads and jump in purposely misinterpreting what I have said and deflecting the thread, and making personal insults. I stopped engaging with you individually a long time ago. You know who you are. Contrary to what you say, you sit and wait for these threads (God knows where you find the time). You love my threads, so get over yourselves.

The thread was a reaction to what someone said on this forum. I have seen it said before and I just thought, no, you do not love your horse. I am surprised, if I am 'preaching to the choir' why so many people are objecting to this thread. It is not aimed at people who have to make that call and the horse is in pain, or they cannot afford to keep the horse in retirement, or the horse just would not settle in retirement (though these are rare horses). It is aimed at people who view their horses as riding machines who will shoot it when it is no longer of use even though they can afford to keep it when it is able to carry them AND in the same breath say they love the horse. They don't; they love RIDING the horse.
		
Click to expand...

Which is why if F has to have a quieter life or retire it will not be here, we only get 6 hours turnout in winter and overnight in summer. I would want him out most of the time, it is ok while he is working but I don't think extended time in a stable is good for any older horse.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

I used to of the view that same routine minus riding was enough for a retired horse .
I have now based on experiances changed my mind .
I would now say same routine with access to proper sized large fields all year so they can move enough to maintain their tone ,it's not reasonable to keep the young ( pre work ) or old ( post work )horse in a restricted grazing set up .


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

PS thank you for kindness Flicker it's hideous here ATM .


----------



## spacefaer (19 August 2016)

Wagtail - I assume retirement involves a horse being in a muddy field because he will be in a field in the winter and it will get muddy. Whether he gets stabled as well is down to facilities and horse's health and preference.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Flicker said:



			We have horses on our livery yard who are on the 'same routine minus the riding'.  I'm not sure I'd have chosen it for my own horse.  The yard is lovely and the staff very caring but it is set up to be a yard for horses in work.  If the fields flood, for example, and everything stays in there are fab indoor facilities and a horse walker - no good for a horse with SI injuries as mine had.  So he would have to stay in and maybe get walked in hand.  Good luck with that with a spirited 16.3 ISH!  Just one example of how it wouldn't work in my situation - believe me, I considered every option!!

I'm just trying to illustrate that, by making sweeping statements, you risk forgetting that everyone's situation is unique to them.  Every decision based on a specific set of circumstances that lead you down a certain path and arrive at a unique outcome.

You seem really caring and a wonderful owner.  Recognising the shades of grey in life, though, is a strength not a weakness.  I hope I've chucked a couple in the mix for you 

I'm glad I came across your thread, and I thank those who have responded in support of me, because it confirms that I did the right thing.  Goldenstar, I'm thinking of you and I hope that you can find a way through this horrible time - big hugs to you.
		
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you. It is not all black and white. You make a decision based on the horse in front of you and the means you have for providing it with the care it needs. And also knowing when something will not suit the horse and so making the kindest decision for it. I support anyone who does this. But this thread is not about that. It is about people who only PTS to get rid of a horse that would happily retire, in order to make space for a new one and then profess to love the horse. Just who are they trying to kid? Themselves? I am not even criticising people actually doing this (it's not something I do myself, but so long as the horse is properly cared for and has a dignified end, then it doesn't make them a bad owner, as I said in my OP). But I cannot see how if someone actually loves a horse, and it WOULD be happy retired, and they can afford it, that they could snuff out its life in order to get a new one. That is all. Not one person who has criticised this thread or said they find it insulting actually fits the criteria, so I fail to see why they think I am aiming it at them. I am not. Though some of them know that.


----------



## Alec Swan (19 August 2016)

I wonder what others would think of me and my treatment of my ewes when their days are over,  from the viewpoint of them being useful.  They go off as cull ewes and in to the food chain.

For those who keep and ride or breed horses,  and when they have a horse which no longer fulfils the owners needs and importantly is of little or no commercial value,  what is to be done with them?

The wonderful Mrs. Gingell who kept and hunted the Cambridgeshire Harriers,  would buy in Hunt horses and on the rare occasions when for what ever reason,  they didn't or couldn't fulfil their duties,  they were fed to hounds.

Are those who decide that when the working days of a horse are over,  and then decide to put them down,  rather than re-home or otherwise pass them on,  so wrong?  Not from here they aren't.  Are horses really any different from sheep?  Not from here they aren't.

Alec.

ps.  I love my sheep,  and horses too!


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

spacefaer said:



			Wagtail - I assume retirement involves a horse being in a muddy field because he will be in a field in the winter and it will get muddy. Whether he gets stabled as well is down to facilities and horse's health and preference.
		
Click to expand...

A lot of people see retirement as just chucking in the field and leaving. There are lots of options available to suit the requirements of individual horses. I have one here who is retired, but although he is out 24/7 with the other in the summer, he will be brought in within the same routine as them in the winter. The owner has three others retired to a field and they are happy. They are hardy types, but this one needs shoes and a stable in winter.


----------



## TheSylv007 (19 August 2016)

Merlod said:



			I&#8217;m not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as it&#8217;s riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldn&#8217;t be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)

2)People who keep their horses going even when it&#8217;s past their time and they are struggling with life (because they &#8220;love&#8221; them too much and just let the horse suffer on even when it can't get up anymore etc)

And then there are the &#8220;normal&#8221; varieties of these;

1)People who PTS because their horse is struggling or they can&#8217;t afford to keep it and they don&#8217;t want it passed from pillar to post.

2)People who retire their horses because they ARE field sound and still understand the horse will be PTS when the time comes.
		
Click to expand...

This is how I read the original post.  I think the OP was talking about people who PTS when the horse can't fulfill the owner's needs any more (not because they are in pain/ill/disturbed per se) and they are not worth keeping alive unless they are performing a job.  I guess it might be about how people decide whether there is an intrinsic value to life, not just functionality.  I can see both sides though and it isn't unreasonable to expect a horse to do a job (whether it be ridden, or just a nice companion who enhances the owners life in another way).


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

Wagtail, may I ask what you hoped or intended to achieve by posting on this subject?

If it was to provoke thought and discussion, then I think you have succeeded - well done! But was it something more than just that?

Personally, I take the professing of love with a wee pinch of salt, i.e. I try not to read too much into it because what 'love' is varies from person to person. What one person feels as 'love' and what they think it signifies might not be exactly the same as the next person.


----------



## Flicker (19 August 2016)

I'm bowing out of this thread.
Hug your horse tonight or send love across the Bridge.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

fburton said:



			Wagtail, may I ask what you hoped or intended to achieve by posting on this subject?

If it was to provoke thought and discussion, then I think you have succeeded - well done! But was it something more than just that?

Personally, I take the professing of love with a wee pinch of salt, i.e. I try not to read too much into it because what 'love' is varies from person to person. What one person feels as 'love' and what they think it signifies might not be the exactly same the next person.
		
Click to expand...

It was sparked by something someone said on here and I didn't want to single them out. It got me thinking about how I would have loved the opportunity to keep my old mare, my horse of a lifetime until her thirties but it was not to be; I was forced to make the decision to PTS. But if she had been happy and healthy then despite not being able to ride her, I would have wanted to keep her in comfortable retirement because I loved her dearly. I find it demeans the word 'love' to use it flippantly and thought that it would be interesting to hear others' views on the matter. I think perhaps the title could have been worded differently, and maybe it would have sounded less contentious, but it was posted off the cuff. 

I guess what I was getting at was that IMO some people are deceiving themselves and/or others by saying they love their horses if they view them as so disposable. I think there is a general protectiveness going on in the horse world which makes it taboo to dare to criticize that type of view which is not present regarding other domestic animals such as dogs and this is an interesting point of discussion I think. Maybe if views could change so that horses became less disposable then fewer would be bred and go through the hardships that many endure.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I completely agree with you. It is not all black and white. You make a decision based on the horse in front of you and the means you have for providing it with the care it needs. And also knowing when something will not suit the horse and so making the kindest decision for it. I support anyone who does this. But this thread is not about that. It is about people who only PTS to get rid of a horse that would happily retire, in order to make space for a new one and then profess to love the horse. Just who are they trying to kid? Themselves? I am not even criticising people actually doing this (it's not something I do myself, but so long as the horse is properly cared for and has a dignified end, then it doesn't make them a bad owner, as I said in my OP). But I cannot see how if someone actually loves a horse, and it WOULD be happy retired, and they can afford it, that they could snuff out its life in order to get a new one. That is all. Not one person who has criticised this thread or said they find it insulting actually fits the criteria, so I fail to see why they think I am aiming it at them. I am not. Though some of them know that.
		
Click to expand...

Your saying you don't understand how people can love the horse and do this that different from saying they can't love the horse and do this and saying they have not the right to say they love the horse which is where  you started .


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Alec Swan said:



			I wonder what others would think of me and my treatment of my ewes when their days are over,  from the viewpoint of them being useful.  They go off as cull ewes and in to the food chain.

For those who keep and ride or breed horses,  and when they have a horse which no longer fulfils the owners needs and importantly is of little or no commercial value,  what is to be done with them?

The wonderful Mrs. Gingell who kept and hunted the Cambridgeshire Harriers,  would buy in Hunt horses and on the rare occasions when for what ever reason,  they didn't or couldn't fulfil their duties,  they were fed to hounds.

Are those who decide that when the working days of a horse are over,  and then decide to put them down,  rather than re-home or otherwise pass them on,  so wrong?  Not from here they aren't.  Are horses really any different from sheep?  Not from here they aren't.

Alec.

ps.  I love my sheep,  and horses too! 

Click to expand...

Alec, I am not saying anything is actually wrong in any of the decisions people make regarding their animals. So long as they are well looked after and have a kind end, that is not wrong IMO. Love does have different meanings. 'I love that colour', 'I love riding', 'I love the wild birds I feed' for example. You love your sheep and horses, for example. But loving an individual (animal or human) is a different kind of love. When they die it devastates you, not just makes you a bit sad. You don't therefore kill them or send them to their deaths as a choice unless it was best for THEM. If you love them like that, then you couldn't. I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Aww come on Alec has been here long enough to get his name right! 

And here you go again on what YOU think love is and assuming other people can't possibly be feeling it because they make different decisions and say different things to what you think you would.


----------



## Mongoose11 (19 August 2016)

This is what riled people from the get go. Wagtail as the arbiter of love - it's laughable.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.
		
Click to expand...

Except that we have now added a load of caveats, including financial to that so not quite end of is it?



Wagtail said:



*I am just saying that they do not love their horse* and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.
		
Click to expand...

No you are saying that you don't think their actions show they love their horse, you have no fricking idea what they actually feel and whether they think that is love or wish to describe it as such or not is entirely up to them. 
You seem to think for some reason that your 'love' is over riding of anyone else's concept and clearly the correct one and that because someone behaves differently to you they can't possibly be feeling it, they just think they do. 

What a load of todswosh.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

Mongoose11 said:



			This is what riled people from the get go. Wagtail as the arbiter of love - it's laughable.
		
Click to expand...

It's not it's sad because it shows a lack of insight and empathy for those who think differently and believe different things .
All this talk of it being better if there fewer horses who they were less disposable that's irrelevant because if horse is unable to work how many other horses there are has no relevance to that horses situation .
Who is Wagtail to judge how devasted someone is .
I feel very sad that there's someone on the forum who will know this post is aimed at her and something she ( or he ) posted whoever you are have a hug from me .


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I find it demeans the word 'love' to use it flippantly and thought that it would be interesting to hear others' views on the matter.
		
Click to expand...

Okay, that is your view. It's clear other people's views differ to a greater or lesser extent. That doesn't make them right and you wrong, or you right and them wrong - because there is no right and wrong (nor a consensus view of it) when it comes to what love actually means - how could there be?




			I think perhaps the title could have been worded differently, and maybe it would have sounded less contentious, but it was posted off the cuff.
		
Click to expand...

Well, yes, it could have been less accusatory - and hence less potentially upsetting / wounding / infuriating.

Can you see why some people might believe you posted to upset and infuriate?

(I personally am not upset.)


----------



## Pearlsasinger (19 August 2016)

FlyingCircus said:



			I would rather people put their unrideable horses to sleep instead of giving them away/selling them. This is if they have no job (eg, can't be broodmare because hereditary issue, not good enough breeding/ a hard keeper that couldn't be an easy companion).

I feel like if you really loved a horse, you'd keep it even if it was unrideable, to atleast give it SOME level of retirement. (ETA: By this, I mean atleast a summer or two. Not just instant PTS of field sound and happy horse just because it served its purpose).



Merlod said:



			I&#8217;m not sure people are getting the point, of this, there seem to be two extremes that nobody seems to be seeing past, I think this post was aimed at the first extreme;

1)People who put their horse down as soon as it&#8217;s riding career is over, even if it would be field sound and happy retired (and say things like he wouldn&#8217;t be happy living out at grass/retired.. um I don't count this as "love" stop pretending you are pts for your horses well-being and just admit it's for you own reasons)

2)People who keep their horses going even when it&#8217;s past their time and they are struggling with life (because they &#8220;love&#8221; them too much and just let the horse suffer on even when it can't get up anymore etc)

And then there are the &#8220;normal&#8221; varieties of these;

1)People who PTS because their horse is struggling or they can&#8217;t afford to keep it and they don&#8217;t want it passed from pillar to post.

2)People who retire their horses because they ARE field sound and still understand the horse will be PTS when the time comes.
		
Click to expand...




Wagtail said:



			Exactly. Put much more clearly than I did.
		
Click to expand...

And there are those who might say that OP falls, or has done in the past, into the 2nd extreme. I am sure she would have been extremely upset if HHO members had criticised her choices on here at the time, rather than keeping their thoughts to themselves. Perhaps she should do others the same courtesy.

It does seem rather strange that OP can profess to 'love' horses regardless of their capabilities, even though she has in the past posted that should her OH change his appearance, especially by putting on weight, she would no longer feel the same about him.

There is a saying which I did not know until I read it on here but which I 'love'  " Not my circus, not my monkeys ". Pretty apt in this case, I think!,
		
Click to expand...


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Pearlsasinger said:



			It does seem rather strange that OP can profess to 'love' horses regardless of their capabilities, even though she has in the past posted that should her OH change his appearance, especially by putting on weight, she would no longer feel the same about him.
		
Click to expand...

I remember her writing the exact opposite. That he has put on a lot of weight and that she still loves him. Is my memory faulty, or yours?  Can you substantiate what you've written about Wagtail here PaS?


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

fburton said:



			Okay, that is your view. It's clear other people's views differ to a greater or lesser extent. That doesn't make them right and you wrong, or you right and them wrong - because there is no right and wrong (nor a consensus view of it) when it comes to what love actually means - how could there be?


Well, yes, it could have been less accusatory - and hence less potentially upsetting / wounding / infuriating.

Can you see why some people might believe you posted to upset and infuriate?

(I personally am not upset.)
		
Click to expand...

I should hope that you're not upset. 

I'm not sure why people get so upset when it doesn't even relate to what they do. It's like if I said people shouldn't say they love their dogs if they then decide they want a new puppy so have the old one PTS. If it doesn't apply to them, why be upset? I could see how it would upset someone who knew I was speaking the truth though.

If you count up the posts though, there are actually getting on for half the contributors who agree with me. I know that many others agree too but are afraid of posting. It is just that the people who like to jump on my threads on a regular basis and purposely misconstrue them in order to have a personal dig have posted tens of times each.


----------



## SpringArising (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			I remember her writing the exact opposite. That he has put on a lot of weight and that she still loves him. Is my memory faulty, or yours?  Can you substantiate what you've written about Wagtail here PaS?
		
Click to expand...

You're right, YCBM


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I'm not sure why people get so upset when it doesn't even relate to what they do. It's like if I said people shouldn't say they love their dogs if they then decide they want a new puppy so have the old one PTS. If it doesn't apply to them, why be upset? I could see how it would upset someone who knew I was speaking the truth though.
		
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean you _intended_ for some people to be upset - to rub their noses in the truth, so to speak, does it? I'm still unclear what you hoped to achieve by posting.




			If you count up the posts though, there are actually getting on for half the contributors who agree with me. I know that many others agree too but are afraid of posting.
		
Click to expand...

If you are trying to gauge opinion, I guess you could have posed the question in a yes/no/it depends poll. (And still could!)


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

fburton said:



			That doesn't mean you _intended_ for some people to be upset - to rub their noses in the truth, so to speak, does it? I'm still unclear what you hoped to achieve by posting.


If you are trying to gauge opinion, I guess you could have posed the question in a yes/no/it depends poll. (And still could!)
		
Click to expand...

I am too unclear what you hope to achieve by these questions, fburton? Could you explain?


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I am too unclear what you hope to achieve by these questions, fburton? Could you explain?
		
Click to expand...

I would like both to understand the motivation behind what seems to me to be an oddly loaded (agenda laden?) question, and to encourage you to lay your cards on the table so that everyone can see where you are coming from - something there may well be misunderstanding about, given the responses so far.


----------



## Micropony (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I am too unclear what you hope to achieve by these questions, fburton? Could you explain?
		
Click to expand...

I also queried the reason for your original post Wagtail, I am genuinely unclear what you were trying to achieve. I assumed you were not deliberately trying to hurt the feelings of people struggling with difficult decisions by making them feel judged and inferior, but I still don't understand why you did post it, particularly in the way you did. Sometimes people post wanting help or advice or reassurance or validation, or to get something off their chest, or because they're happy and want to share, or something humorous out of idle curiosity, but I can't figure this one out.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

I do feel like I have had every question about affordability ignored wagtail  

I love the afraid of posting argument too .

I haven't misconstrued anything which is why I took the time to quote your original post back to you because you seem to have spent most of the thread moving the goalposts somewhat. 

It doesn't have apply to people to upset them, or to think that you are out of line and way off the mark deciding what you think love means and saying others can't possibly be feeling it.


----------



## Theocat (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			It was sparked by something someone said on here and I didn't want to single them out. It got me thinking about how I would have loved the opportunity to keep my old mare, my horse of a lifetime until her thirties but it was not to be; I was forced to make the decision to PTS. But if she had been happy and healthy then despite not being able to ride her, I would have wanted to keep her in comfortable retirement because I loved her dearly. I find it demeans the word 'love' to use it flippantly and thought that it would be interesting to hear others' views on the matter. I think perhaps the title could have been worded differently, and maybe it would have sounded less contentious, but it was posted off the cuff. 

I guess what I was getting at was that IMO some people are deceiving themselves and/or others by saying they love their horses if they view them as so disposable. I think there is a general protectiveness going on in the horse world which makes it taboo to dare to criticize that type of view which is not present regarding other domestic animals such as dogs and this is an interesting point of discussion I think. Maybe if views could change so that horses became less disposable then fewer would be bred and go through the hardships that many endure.
		
Click to expand...

I suspect it was my post, on the affordability thread -  but of course, if you singled it out - or even better, quoted it - that would make it clear that my reasons are those of affordability. So the whole thread has been triggered by a wilful misrepresentation.

Having started this thread and deliberately misrepresented the original post in order to make a hurtful and ridiculously theoretical argument, please have the courtesy to explain exactly where on the "skint" scale we need to be before you consider PTS acceptable. You have been asked to do so several times, have made it clear that "financial circumstances" make it okay, but have continued to insist that some owners who do make that decision for those reasons are in the wrong. Please explain your reasoning.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

That was where I assumed it had come from hence my queries why financial reasons suddenly seemed to become fine halfway through the thread


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

ester said:



			I love the afraid of posting argument too .
		
Click to expand...



Why is this funny, Ester?  I've deleted three drafts of posts on this thread since it started because I am afraid of being misinterpreted. There has been a lot of misinterpretation going on.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

So we are button pushing now? Seriously the button should have been pushed on wagtail a long time ago on this thread, button pushing for f E c K I N g I've heard it all now. 

The goal posts are changing with every single additional post and then swap again once you get a post of support. Nobody has the right to say what love means to another, I get stick  a lot because I refuse to medicate and if my horse was diagnosed with a long term condition needing medication then I wouldn't do it. Had my horse 15years through thick and thin and I don't think one person who has met me wouldn't say I didn't love my horse.


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Theocat said:



			have continued to insist that some owners who do make that decision for those reasons are in the wrong. Please explain your reasoning.
		
Click to expand...

My point exactly. At no time has Wagtail said that anyone is in the wrong to put a horse down for any reason whatsoever. She has said exactly the reverse, several times.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			My point exactly. At no point has Wagtail said that anyone is in the wrong to put a horse down for any reason whatsoever. She has said exactly the reverse, several times.
		
Click to expand...

I think you need to look at this again. She has said that the person doing it doesn't love the horse, so by that she is implying that it's wrong is she not?


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Because wagtail is one to bring it out fairly regularly on her contraversial threads, I'm surprised she hasn't said she has had PMs from them. It just amuses me a bit that there is some secret HHO massive that would agree with her, for certain, they just haven't posted. It is very presumptive! But then I guess presumptive is the name of the game here anyway.
I must be the worlds worst worrier for being misinterpreted as it happens a lot in my life, I think we can safely say it doesn't stop me posting


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			My point exactly. At no time has Wagtail said that anyone is in the wrong to put a horse down for any reason whatsoever. She has said exactly the reverse, several times.
		
Click to expand...

that's because she seems to be backtracking on her original post which said 




			If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.
		
Click to expand...

and now it seems to be that it isn't as clear cut and end of as she first stated and now if you can't afford it it's fine as well as if the horse is broken. And actually it might only be the case if you replace it immediately with a rideable one? Which is not what was stated at the start. So wagtail has either changed her mind or didn't write what she meant to in the first instance.


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Black Beastie said:



			I think you need to look at this again. She has said that the person doing it doesn't love the horse, so by that she is implying that it's wrong is she not?
		
Click to expand...

No, she is not. She is not saying it is right or wrong not to love the horse. She is specially saying over and over again that it is not wrong to put a horse down for any reason at all.

The ONLY thing she is saying is that if you can afford to keep a horse retired, and that horse would be happy and healthy retired, then you can't love the horse if you choose instead to have it killed.

Now, I actually agree with that, very limited, point. And I agree because I have had only one horse in my life to whom I would have given a retirement in those circumstances. I freely accept that I simply did not love the others enough, or value the sanctity of life for life itself enough, to retire them.

Discuss that if you wish, but I see no point in continuing to discuss how awful it is to say things which were never said.


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			My point exactly. At no time has Wagtail said that anyone is in the wrong to put a horse down for any reason whatsoever. She has said exactly the reverse, several times.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, but Wagtail _has_ said that people cannot have loved (or still be loving) their horse if they had it pts because it could no longer be ridden (the phrase "as soon as" is a bit loaded). For some definitions of 'love' this is undoubtedly true. (One could even make "not pts because it could no longer be ridden" part of the definition.) However, I would question whether it can be applied to _all_ definitions of love, and imagine at least the possibility of people being hurt by the suggestion that they didn't love their horse, even if that love would be considered to be somehow inferior by the majority of other people.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			No, she is not. She is not saying it is right or wrong not to love the horse. She is specially saying over and over again that it is not wrong to put a horse down for any reason at all.

The ONLY thing she is saying is that if you can afford to keep a horse retired, and that horse would be happy and healthy retired, then you can't love the horse if you choose instead to have it killed.

Now, I actually agree with that, very limited, point. And I agree because I have had only one horse in my life to whom I would have given a retirement in those circumstances. I freely accept that I simply did not love the others enough, or value the sanctity of life for life itself enough, to retire them.

Discuss that if you wish, but I see no point in continuing to discuss how awful it is to say things which were never said.
		
Click to expand...


She is saying you don't love a horse if you PTS just because you can't ride it which is bull crap, in her original post  which has been quoted above, she stated the complete opposite to what she is now posting and what you are now saying. 

It's the wriggling around on the self made hook which is the aggravating thing. You stated something so go ahead and own it don't then back out and twist when you find the vast majority don't agree with you. I'm not a popular poster due to the fact that I don't agree with people a lot but I bleeding well own and stand by what I post even when being slated.


----------



## Theocat (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			I see no point in continuing to discuss how awful it is to say things which were never said.
		
Click to expand...

The WHOLE THREAD is discussing how awful something is which was never said!

I am taking this personally because it is based on a comment by me, and Wagtail has subsequently taken it upon herself to tell the world that I do not love my horse - in exactly those words. Not only is she wrong about that, but she has misrepresented what I originally said to make her point. Very, very hurtful.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			Why is this funny, Ester?  I've deleted three drafts of posts on this thread since it started because I am afraid of being misinterpreted. There has been a lot of misinterpretation going on.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think you can misinterpret the title of the thread .
It's very clear it's not an invitation to discuss the subject to explore it if you like its a clear statement of fact as Wagtail sees it .


----------



## Merrymoles (19 August 2016)

Am left open mouthed by all this - particularly by the original post which shows a complete lack of empathy.

I love the very bones of my horse but I am not sure how he would take to retirement. If he did not, then it would be the fact that I love him and don't want him ever to return to the stressed, depressed creature he once was that I would PTS. I have known a number of horses over the last 35 years who did not thrive once they couldn't get out and about. My horse's current fieldmate, however, would love to retire when the time comes.

Now I'm joining Illusion100 and bowing out.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Goldenstar said:



			I don't think you can misinterpret the title of the thread .
It's very clear it's not an invitation to discuss the subject to explore it if you like its a clear statement of fact as Wagtail sees it .
		
Click to expand...

quite, particularly with the 'end of' statement, that was hardly an invitation that the topic was up for discussion was it. Sorry to hear about your chap GS.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

ester said:



			quite, particularly with the 'end of' statement, that was hardly an invitation that the topic was up for discussion was it. Sorry to hear about your chap GS.
		
Click to expand...

THank you Ester , it's a bit of a nightmare .


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			No, she is not. She is not saying it is right or wrong not to love the horse. She is specially saying over and over again that it is not wrong to put a horse down for any reason at all.

The ONLY thing she is saying is that if you can afford to keep a horse retired, and that horse would be happy and healthy retired, then you can't love the horse if you choose instead to have it killed.

Now, I actually agree with that, very limited, point. And I agree because I have had only one horse in my life to whom I would have given a retirement in those circumstances. I freely accept that I simply did not love the others enough, or value the sanctity of life for life itself enough, to retire them.

Discuss that if you wish, but I see no point in continuing to discuss how awful it is to say things which were never said.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you, YCBM. I have indeed said over and over that I do not think it is wrong to put a horse down for any reason so long as it is treated kindly. I also said it does not make you a bad owner if you do.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Thank you, YCBM. I have indeed said over and over that I do not think it is wrong to put a horse down for any reason so long as it is treated kindly. I also said it does not make you a bad owner if you do.
		
Click to expand...

We all get that .
it's not what the threads about .
The threads about your judgement of when others love or don't love horses .


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Theocat said:



			The WHOLE THREAD is discussing how awful something is which was never said!

I am taking this personally because it is based on a comment by me, and Wagtail has subsequently taken it upon herself to tell the world that I do not love my horse - in exactly those words. Not only is she wrong about that, but she has misrepresented what I originally said to make her point. Very, very hurtful.
		
Click to expand...

If you never said it, then the thread cannot, by definition, be about you unless it names you. The only person who has named you is you.


----------



## Mince Pie (19 August 2016)

Report me all you want, Wagtail, I stand by what I said. I find your behaviour and attitude completely appalling, there are very few people generally who will arrange to have a horse PTS because it is no longer useful and I would be surprised if they profess to love their horse. All this thread has achieved is to upset a lot of people.


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Goldenstar said:



			We all get that .
it's not what the threads about .
The threads about your judgement of when others love or don't love horses .
		
Click to expand...

This isn't true I'm afraid   many people who have replied haven't got that at all, which is why she has to keep repeating it in response to people accusing her of saying things she has not said.


----------



## Batgirl (19 August 2016)

Theocat said:



			This is aimed directly at me.

Wagtail, love isn't a fixed, absolute thing, and even in relationships between humans whether love exists or survives depends on so many circumstances - not just the individuals involved.  It is possible to genuinely love someone (or something) and for that love to change or fade if circumstances change.  

Imagine a scenario where a couple fell in love over a mutual love of cycling, and had years of being in love and cycling together.  One day, one of them no longer can, or will, get on a bike.  Easy enough to image that the relationship could change - you're a fool if you think otherwise.

I love my horse - but I also love riding.  If the latter was removed, I'd still have the horse - but I would lose a very large part of the enjoyment of my life.  It would still be costing me a fortune.  I am honest enough to admit that I am human.  I know that my feelings towards the horse are likely to change as the circumstances change.  That doesn't mean a lack of love.

For those who love the horse but send it away to retirement livery or a blood bank - I don't have a problem with that, and it's certainly none of my business.  But fundamentally, what's in it for the horse?  Why is a longer life better than a short one?  And what is the owner getting out of it?  If they love the horse (more than those ghastly ones amongst us who would put down instead) how can they bear to be parted from it?  I can't see that keeping a horse alive and sending it away shows any more love than having it put down.

I'd love to have my own grounds and keep my happy retired horses forever more.  I don't, and I'm honest enough to admit that paying out hundreds of pounds a month, when I can no longer ride, would affect my feelings for my horse.  That doesn't mean there's no love there.

You may stick your nose in and judge all you like when the welfare of an animal is compromised.  You have no right  to pass public judgement on how others must feel, and you certainly cannot know it.
		
Click to expand...

Perfectly put my feelings on this issue.


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Mince Pie said:



			Report me all you want, Wagtail, I stand by what I said. I find your behaviour and attitude completely appalling, thereare very few people generally who will arrange to have a horse PTS because it is no longer useful and I would be surprised if they profess to love their horse. All this thread has achieved is to upset a lot of people.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true, Mince Pie.  I know lots of people who will, and have, put a horse down just because it will no longer carry a rider.  I am not one of them, but I would not rule out becoming one of them in future if I don't feel an emotional tie to the horse strong enough to offer it retirement.

The thread has indeed upset a lot of people, but the vast majority of them have described a situation which is simply not what Wagtail was writing about and then accused her of being nasty about them.


----------



## Mongoose11 (19 August 2016)

I don't think people have complained about Wagtail being nasty to them. I think most people have complained about Wagtail seeming to be judgemental, hypocritical and sanctimonious. I can't be bothered to trawl through for other adjectives but I don't remember the word nasty being used.


----------



## merlin100 (19 August 2016)

I may never ride my pony, but would happily keep her as a pet for the rest of her life.


----------



## Mince Pie (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			I don't think this is true, Mince Pie.  I know lots of people who will, and have, put a horse down just because it will no longer carry a rider.  I am not one of them, but I would not rule out becoming one of them in future if I don't feel an emotional tie to the horse strong enough to offer it retirement.

The thread has indeed upset a lot of people, but the vast majority of them have described a situation which is simply not what Wagtail was writing about and then accused her of being nasty about them.
		
Click to expand...

I was talking about the grand scheme of things, if you look at all the pleasure riders in the UK it would be a small percentage.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			I remember her writing the exact opposite. That he has put on a lot of weight and that she still loves him. Is my memory faulty, or yours?  Can you substantiate what you've written about Wagtail here PaS?
		
Click to expand...

I really cannot be bothered to go trawling back through all Wagtail's posts, I am afraid.
My recollection is that within that thread, Wagtail did a complete about face, so maybe we are both correct. Of course if you would like you to do the trawl ............


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Pearlsasinger said:



			I really cannot be bothered to go trawling back through all Wagtail's posts, I am afraid.
My recollection is that within that thread, Wagtail did a complete about face, so maybe we are both correct. Of course if you would like you to do the trawl ............
		
Click to expand...

Surely you should be sure that you are right before making an offensive allegation about what someone has posted?. It is for you to prove what you wrote, not for me to disprove it. Wagtail has confirmed my recollection, and until you prove otherwise, then your claim that she said that she would not love her husband if he put on weight remains a libel.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden. 

We all have different views, and it is true that the horse doesn't know it is going to be PTS because when it's dead, it's dead and so long as it is done well, then it is none the wiser. It does not suffer. If the owner has also taken care of it well throughout ownership, then they are a good owner from the horse's point of view. But please, people who state that they will PTS as soon as the horse cannot do its job, even if it is very happy and comfortable not being ridden, you do not love the horse. You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.

Now, I am not for one second condemning people who do this. Not one bit. I am just saying that they do not love their horse and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.
		
Click to expand...

This is my OP. What have I changed? I have clarified by explaining a few points that were queried, but not changed anything.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

fburton said:



			I would like both to understand the motivation behind what seems to me to be an oddly loaded (agenda laden?) question, and to encourage you to lay your cards on the table so that everyone can see where you are coming from - something there may well be misunderstanding about, given the responses so far.
		
Click to expand...

I have no agenda. I think I have fully explained why I posted this thread. There is no misunderstanding. It is fully intentional by a number of posters. The same posters do it over and over on my threads which is why I do not respond to them. They are the only ones with agendas. I just wanted a discussion because I hear it being said a lot in the horse world. Maybe I just like people to be genuine about what they say and not make throw away comments. I repeat again. I am not condemning putting an animal to sleep. I have admitted myself that I have only truly loved one horse. I think I will get to that with my current mare but I am not there yet. So I can admit it, and YCBM has admitted it, why can't others?  I just find it hard to comprehend how if someone really loves a horse, they can put it to sleep even if it is field sound and happy in retirement, so they can get a new one. I can only imagine that they just haven't met 'that' horse yet. I am interested in genuine responses.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			Surely you should be sure that you are right before making an offensive allegation about what someone has posted?. It is for you to prove what you wrote, not for me to disprove it. Wagtail has confirmed my recollection, and until you prove otherwise, then your claim that she said that she would not love her husband if he put on weight remains a libel.
		
Click to expand...

Oh I did not say that I am not sure. What I said was that I could not be bothered to trawl back through Wagtail's posts. If someone alleges libel, the onus is on them to prove their allegation.

Should anyone decide to check, they will find another circular thread, similar to  this one.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Please do not make incorrect allegations from a totally irrelevant thread on a private forum and post them on a searchable forum, Pearlsasinger.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			Surely you should be sure that you are right before making an offensive allegation about what someone has posted?. It is for you to prove what you wrote, not for me to disprove it. Wagtail has confirmed my recollection, and until you prove otherwise, then your claim that she said that she would not love her husband if he put on weight remains a libel.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder whose friend you are in real life to be defending someone who has blatantly crossed a line  also you really have a cheek to go on about someone being offensive when the most offensive person on this thread has been the OP herself according to the majority of people who think that she is outrageous in her opinion that she can define love for everyone, personally I think you are just out to claim some notoriety for yourself by standing by wagtail as she leads another merry dance. It's not her first rodeo and won't be her last I'm sure.

Wagtail you do have an agenda for posting this thread. There must have been a trigger, which going by theocats upset post it was aimed not so covertly at them. You haven't clarified points you have changed from you absolute statement to adding caveats to try and deflect from the original insulting and blatantly hurtful post.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Black Beastie said:



			I wonder whose friend you are in real life to be defending someone who has blatantly crossed a line  also you really have a cheek to go on about someone being offensive when the most offensive person on this thread has been the OP herself according to the majority of people who think that she is outrageous in her opinion that she can define love for everyone, personally I think you are just out to claim some notoriety for yourself by standing by wagtail as she leads another merry dance. It's not her first rodeo and won't be her last I'm sure.

Wagtail you do have an agenda for posting this thread. There must have been a trigger, which going by theocats upset post it was aimed not so covertly at them. You haven't clarified points you have changed from you absolute statement to adding caveats to try and deflect from the original insulting and blatantly hurtful post.
		
Click to expand...

BB I have not responded so far to you because your posts have been so rude, but do not want YCBM to be tarred on here like I am and can assure you that I have never met her in my life! Good grief!


----------



## SusieT (19 August 2016)

I think there is a lot of guilt here showing in the responses. It is simple - if you have a horse who can happily be retired in the field - not as taken out of context by many showing exmaples of lame or unmanageable horses, and you choose not to because you wish to buy another horse to ride or don't wish to commit to visiting daily etc. even though you could manage this while the horse was ridden it is incomprehensible that you love that horse as much as you claim - the phrase 'I love my horse but...' is so often bandied about. It is better to be honest and say that you love riding more...


----------



## KittenInTheTree (19 August 2016)

Celery.


----------



## fburton (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			I have no agenda. I think I have fully explained why I posted this thread. There is no misunderstanding. It is fully intentional by a number of posters. The same posters do it over and over on my threads which is why I do not respond to them. They are the only ones with agendas. I just wanted a discussion because I hear it being said a lot in the horse world. Maybe I just like people to be genuine about what they say and not make throw away comments. I repeat again. I am not condemning putting an animal to sleep.
		
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I don't want you to feel I am unfairly pressuring you to reveal a motivation that isn't there. (Confess! Confess! )




			I have admitted myself that I have only truly loved one horse.
		
Click to expand...

Hmm, so is there a distinction between "true love" and just "love"?




			I think I will get to that with my current mare but I am not there yet. So I can admit it, and YCBM has admitted it, why can't others?  I just find it hard to comprehend how if someone really loves a horse, they can put it to sleep even if it is field sound so they can get a new one. I can only imagine that they just haven't met 'that' horse yet. I am interested in genuine responses.
		
Click to expand...

For what it is worth - and since you are soliciting responses - I wouldn't choose to have a horse of mine pts after it ceased to be rideable, even if I didn't "truly love" it, as long as it wasn't suffering and was capable of enjoying life. I might be forced to by circumstances, but that would only be after failing to find a good enough home. It would be a sense of responsibility rather than any real feelings of love that motivated me; I would feel bad about pts a healthy horse. But that's just me, and I certainly wouldn't be critical of people with different outlooks or priorities as long as a horse's welfare wasn't being compromised.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Right, in order to get offended by this thread you must be intending to put your horse to sleep as soon as it reaches the end of its working life, even though it is field sound and happy to be retired and you can afford to keep it AND you profess to love said horse. Judging by the responses here there are a lot more people who think this way than I thought! If you do not fall into this category, then why be offended? And if you do, then why do you care what someone says on an internet forum?


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Black Beastie said:



			I wonder whose friend you are in real life to be defending someone who has blatantly crossed a line  also you really have a cheek to go on about someone being offensive when the most offensive person on this thread has been the OP herself according to the majority of people who think that she is outrageous in her opinion that she can define love for everyone, personally I think you are just out to claim some notoriety for yourself by standing by wagtail as she leads another merry dance. It's not her first rodeo and won't be her last I'm sure.

Wagtail you do have an agenda for posting this thread. There must have been a trigger, which going by theocats upset post it was aimed not so covertly at them. You haven't clarified points you have changed from you absolute statement to adding caveats to try and deflect from the original insulting and blatantly hurtful post.
		
Click to expand...

I am the friend of every single person who is misquoted on this forum including you if it happens to you and I spot it.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			BB I have not responded so far to you because your posts have been so rude, but do not want YCBM to be tarred on here like I am and can assure you that I have never met her in my life! Good grief!
		
Click to expand...

My verion of to the point and incredulous is rude looking to you. Oh my what a shame, needless to say I don't feel anything close to remorse about upsetting someone like yourself, you who has decided that the only definition of love or care is yours. Pot and kettle I'm afraid.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

fburton said:



			Fair enough. I don't want you to feel I unfairly pressuring you to reveal a motivation that isn't there. (Confess! Confess! )


Hmm, so is there a distinction between "true love" and just "love"? 


For what it is worth - and since you are soliciting responses - I wouldn't choose to have a horse of mine pts after it ceased to be rideable, even if I didn't "truly love" it, as long as it wasn't suffering and was capable of enjoying life. I might be forced to by circumstances, but that would only be after failing to find a good enough home. It would be a sense of responsibility rather than any real feelings of love that motivated me; I would feel bad about pts a healthy horse. But that's just me, and I certainly wouldn't be critical of people with different outlooks or priorities as long as horses' welfare wasn't being compromised.
		
Click to expand...

And that is exactly what I do. I am extremely fond of my current mare and she has a home for life with me(barring financial disasters). But I am lucky in that I have my own facilities here and who's to say what I would feel if things were different. But I could not state I would put her to sleep if she could no longer be ridden but was happy retired, and then say that I loved her, because that would not be true. I couldn't do it if I loved her. When I say 'truly' I mean genuinely, if that helps?


----------



## Neversaydie (19 August 2016)

Just to clarify 

Op has stated that a horse that cannot be ridden anymore shouldn't be PTS so as the owner can have a horse to do a job? So OP states that anyone who does this on this basis does not love the horse? Is this the crux of the issue here? 

Well what about this then, horse is unable to do a job so owner turfs horse out in a field or into retirement and gets another one, keeps the unrideable horse Going just for the sake of it, give basic care and continues to ride and compete new horse whilst previous horse just languishes in the field until old age or the reason it cannot be ridden makes its life untenable. To me this isn't love. Most horses who aren't able to be ridden anymore aren't healthy or young so really the OPs point is a moot one. If mine were unrideable and I wasn't able to keep them then PTS would be the kindest thing rather than pass them on to an uncertain future. It take a lot of love and compassion to PTS a horse because you can't bear the thought of passing it on. Too many sad and neglected horses in adverts right now that I look at and think I would have PTS.


----------



## Mongoose11 (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Right, in order to get offended by this thread you must be intending to put your horse to sleep as soon as it reaches the end of its working life, even though it is field sound and happy to be retired and you can afford to keep it AND you profess to love said horse. Judging by the responses here there are a lot more people who think this way than I thought! If you do not fall into this category, then why be offended? And if you do, then why do you care what someone says on an internet forum?
		
Click to expand...

You are wilfully choosing to misinterpret the responses of many while complaining that they are wilfully misinterpreting your own. The majority accept that you are not condemning the action but the majority are reacting to your supposed ability to be judge and jury when it comes to an individual's feelings about their animal and the belief that only a certain set of circumstances can mean that they love their horse.

If only the legions of posters would feel brave enough to post their support.


----------



## ycbm (19 August 2016)

Neversaydie said:



			Just to clarify 

Op has stated that a horse that cannot be ridden anymore shouldn't be PTS so as the owner can have a horse to do a job?
		
Click to expand...

NO!!

OP has said no such thing!


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Neversaydie said:



			Just to clarify 

Op has stated that a horse that cannot be ridden anymore shouldn't be PTS so as the owner can have a horse to do a job? So OP states that anyone who does this on this basis does not love the horse? Is this the crux of the issue here?
		
Click to expand...

No, that is not what I have said at all.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Black Beastie said:



			My verion of to the point and incredulous is rude looking to you. Oh my what a shame, needless to say I don't feel anything close to remorse about upsetting someone like yourself, you who has decided that the only definition of love or care is yours. Pot and kettle I'm afraid.
		
Click to expand...

No worries, you have not upset me one jot BB. I just don't respond to rude posts.


----------



## Neversaydie (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			You say you will PTS as soon as it can no longer be ridden. 

We all have different views, and it is true that the horse doesn't know it is going to be PTS because when it's dead, it's dead and so long as it is done well, then it is none the wiser. It does not suffer. If the owner has also taken care of it well throughout ownership, then they are a good owner from the horse's point of view. But please, people who state that they will PTS as soon as the horse cannot do its job, even if it is very happy and comfortable not being ridden, you do not love the horse. You love riding the horse and competing the horse and hunting the horse, or hacking, whatever, and you are probably a kind responsible owner, but you do not love your horse. If you really love your horse for itself, as a living, breathing being, then you would keep the horse in retirement, end of.

Now, I am not for one second condemning people who do this. Not one bit. I am just saying that they do not love their horse and they shouldn't state that they do. They care for it and treat it well but they do not know what it is like to love a horse if that is what they think it is. 

Also, not all horses are equal. Some get to you more than others. One day they may meet a horse that they really do love, and then to PTS so they can get a new one would be the last thing they would want to do. 

Then they will know what it is like to love a horse.
		
Click to expand...




Wagtail said:



			No, that is not what I have said at all.
		
Click to expand...

According to this yes you did. I have only read the first and last page of this thread I'm afraid. Too much to trawl through. 

You are clearly stating that if someone PTS a horse who they propose to love just because they are unrideable and want a ridden horse then they do not love that horse according to your definition of love. 

I don't understand why you don't think this is the reason you are getting negative replies?


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Neversaydie said:



			According to this yes you did. I have only read the first and last page of this thread I'm afraid. Too much to trawl through. 

You are clearly stating that if someone PTS a horse who they propose to love just because they are unrideable and want a ridden horse then they do not love that horse according to your definition of love.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, that is correct. But originally you said:




			Op has stated that a horse that cannot be ridden anymore shouldn't be PTS so as the owner can have a horse to do a job? So OP states that anyone who does this on this basis does not love the horse? Is this the crux of the issue here?
		
Click to expand...

which is not what I said at all.


----------



## Sandstone1 (19 August 2016)

As far as I can see the Op is saying that if you have a horse that is unable to be ridden anymore, but can live a comfortable  and happy life as a field ornament and you can afford to keep that horse in a comfortable retirement then you don't really love the horse if you choose to have it put to sleep?
 If I understand it correctly, then I have to say I fully agree with the op.
To have a horse put to sleep for humane grounds is one thing and I've had to do it more than once, however I couldn't do it if the horse was able to have a happy life just being a horse.


----------



## Neversaydie (19 August 2016)

Wagtail said:



			Yes, that is correct. But originally you said:



which is not what I said at all.
		
Click to expand...

I have said the same thing just in a slightly different way which in no way changes the meaning? Is this a case of semantics to change the way or meaning something that was written in poor taste? You seem very strange OP you have taken it upon yourself to declare the definition of others feeling for their animals and that's a very slippery and treacherous slope to be on. This seems to be the crux of everyone issues with your post. Calling annoyed people rude when you yourself are seeming so perhaps isn't a good game plan either. Very odd thread for a Friday I have to say.


----------



## Wagtail (19 August 2016)

Neversaydie said:



			I have said the same thing just in a slightly different way which in no way changes the meaning? Is this a case of semantics to change the way or meaning something that was written in poor taste? You seem very strange OP you have taken it upon yourself to declare the definition of others feeling for their animals and that's a very slippery and treacherous slope to be on. This seems to be the crux of everyone issues with your post. Calling annoyed people rude when you yourself are seeming so perhaps isn't a good game plan either. Very odd thread for a Friday I have to say.
		
Click to expand...


No, you have said a completely different thing, not the same thing in a different way.


----------



## Neversaydie (19 August 2016)

Wowsers.

Well I'm leaving this here, the hole is too deep yet the digging continues. Now that I have had a chance to read through the thread I do believe that the OP just wanted a reaction and I feel disappointed in myself for giving one. This will teach me to read through all the pages before replying.


----------



## ester (19 August 2016)

Well I have previously quoted the salient points in your OP and where you have done an about turn, in order to counter all this 'no people are just misreading what I said'

You are yet to respond to those points....


----------



## Mongoose11 (19 August 2016)

ester said:



			Well I have previously quoted the salient points in your OP and where you have done an about turn, in order to counter all this 'no people are just misreading what I said'

You are yet to respond to those points....
		
Click to expand...

You may have joined my category of poster 'those who she refuses to engage with'.


----------



## FfionWinnie (19 August 2016)

Mongoose11 said:



			You may have joined my category of poster 'those who she refuses to engage with'.
		
Click to expand...

What the ones who are right you mean


----------



## Evie91 (19 August 2016)

Wow, I don't know Wagtail but I do feel she gets some flack! Some of it is really not nice (name calling imo is never justified).
I haven't read the thread Theocat is referring to and I'm very sorry for all who have lost a loved and trusted companion and especially for Satans little helper, her loss is incomprehensible. 
However, I do think for a discussion group Wagtail always provides good value for money- the threads go on for many more pages than the average thread! Surely it's good to have a debate every now and again?!


----------



## Alec Swan (19 August 2016)

There's a sense of enmity festering away and maturing in this thread.  It's a shame really.

Just thought I'd mention it,  in case no one else had noticed. 

Alec.


----------

