# The Brooke animal hospital causes suffering to animals



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

I have just returned from holiday in Luxor, Egypt and must bring to your attention lack of care and suffering caused to animals due to The Brooke.

On Saturday 14th April my husband and I were making our way to ACE - Animal Care in Luxor and travelling by horse and carriage (locally known as a caleche).  The journey takes you past The Brooke, a much bigger and wealthier charity than ACE, and advertised quite extensively throughout the centre of Luxor and nearby the airport.  The facilities and centre are poor to say the least.  The offices rented by The Brooke, nearby the centre however are far more luxorious.

Our caleche driver was alerted to the fact that a friends horse had been admitted to The Brooke, and was badly injuredafter being hit by a bus.  He told us it was the caleche driver and horse we had used the previous day, and a man we have known for several years.  What I witness shocked me to the core of my heart.

The horse was lying sedated on foam mats in a stable with a sand floor.  His wounds had been stitched up and he was covered in flies.  I went over to the vet and asked him about the condition of the horse.  He told me there were no broken bones, it just had superficial wounds,  however it would make a full recovery, and stay at the centre for 3 weeks to recuperate.  I must say the horse did look in a very poor state, it was lying in alot of blood.  During my time here the vet spent all his time sat at a desk talking to other Egyptians.  I felt he should be monitoring the horse and not sat relaxing.

We continued on our way to ACE, roughly 10 minutes further up the road. This is a much smaller charity set up 10 years ago, but their facilities are superb.  We were made welcome and given a guided tour of the facilities there and the current inmates.

After a few minutes a dog was carried in and taken to the small animal treatment room.  The staff were soon covering their noses as the smell of rotting flesh was very strong.
The dog was examined thoroughly, before it was decided the only humane thing to do was to put it to sleep.  Its injuries included two broken legs.  Three days previously it had been taken to The Brooke where they had wrapped cotton wool and a bandage round it and sent it home.  When the dog started to deteriorate the owners brought it to ACE.  My fears for the horse I had left behind were very immediate.

After spending one and a half hours at ACE we started to make our way back to the hotel, which again took us by The Brooke.  I asked the driver to stop so I could look in on the horse.  The sight that greeted me will stay with me for a long time.

The horse was now off the mats, lying on the sand floor.  Much of the stitching had ripped open and it had gaping wounds.  The flies were in masses over its body, and the horses breathing was very laboured.  It had a large wound on its back leg, and it was losing a tremendous amount of blood.

The vet was sat down chatting showing no concern for the animal.  The initial time I saw him he smiled and appeared concerned for the horse.  This time he was very dismissive of me, saying the horse was perfectly ok and would make a full recovery.  15 minutes later the horse died.

I FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT THIS POOR ANIMAL WAS NOT EVEN AFFORDED THE VERY BASIC TREATMENT OF BEING PUT TO SLEEP.

The Brooke Hospital for horses according to its year end balance sheet had a record year in 2010/11.  Fundraising income grew to 14.8m.  They had record breaking legacies of £5,871.000.  Their President is The Duchess of Cornwall, and two of their Patrons include Sir Peter O'Sullivan and Captain Richard Waygood.

The Brooke is a very well known charity in the equestrian world, however if you knew what was going on at the charity, and the poor level of care, I am sure you would give your hard earned money elsewhere.  

I know they have centres elsewhere in the world, but what they are providing out in Luxor, Egypt is wholly unacceptable.

Where is the money going?  In the centre parked up are four 4x4 signwritten vehicles.  Do you see these out and about in Luxor tending to animals in need?  They are never seen out and about, just ask any of the caleche drivers. 

This Charity is corrupt to the core, and the injured horse was neglected and left to die in pain and agony.  Dorothy Brooke who started the charity in 1934 would turn in her grave if she  had witnessed the lack of care.  

I have photographic evidence to support my case.

I felt Horse and Hound readers should be aware, please help me to expose this charity.
[HR][/HR]
*AN OFFICIAL RESPONSE FROM THE BROOKE CAN BE READ VIA THE LINK BELOW:*
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/foru...to-animals&p=10662456&viewfull=1#post10662456


----------



## HappyHooves (26 April 2012)

have you been in touch with the Brooke to ask them their opinion? It sounds dreadful - would H & H run a story on it?


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

I have not contacted The Brooke.  However they deny they have any vehicles out in Luxor.  As I have seen them with my own eyes, I have no trust in them whatsoever.


----------



## depurple1 (26 April 2012)

If this is the full story, then it's a shame this centre has gone downhill - certainly when I visited The Brooke in Luxor a few years ago it seemed like a well run facility.  The vet gave me a full tour and all the horses I saw were being well cared for.  I would hope that The Brooke will investigate this if you get in touch with them.


----------



## finnywinny (26 April 2012)

Having raised a considerable amount of money for The Brooke in the past your story raises huge concerns. You should really try to persue this to find out what is going on. Certainly contact the main office in London, maybe meet them (sorry, not sure where you are located). You have photos to back up your story. This needs explaining and action taking  What you describe is inhumane and the antithesis of all The Brooke is meant to stand for.

Maybe they have just one vet that isn't doing his job? 

When i was in Jordan, having completed a fund raising ride, I know The Brooke was really unpopular with the locals. A bit of digging seemed to reveal that it was general resentment from people who had very little seeing so much funding going on their "beasts of burden". Apparently they would demand TV's etc - but its all one persons word against another.

Please do keep us updated with what you decide to do and what The Brooke have to say about it. As you mention it has some very high profile supporters and campaigners, it could be potentially explosive.


----------



## muddymate (26 April 2012)

"just ask any of the caleche drivers"
What shall we call YOUR charity? FOECD (Friend Of Egyptian Caleche Drivers)? Why are you swanning around in a caleche in all that heat and obvious danger to horses (that are hit by vehicles etc.)?
I really CANNOT imagine that you would be allowed near the animals in the extreme state that you describe, as a jolly tourist, especially if the organisations in question HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE... 
I will forward a link to this thread to Brooke, even though I am sure that they have much better things to do than deal with than your bad grammar.
Enjoy the rest of your holiday; I understand that half starved horses working in the environs of the pyramids are desperate for more work.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

My utmost concern is for the animals out there, and the lack of care shown by The Brooke, who are obviously out of their depth.  Have you been out to Luxor, have you been in a caleche in April?  Egypt is suffering due to the lack of tourists, we love the country and the people.  We try to support them in this difficult time.  We always chose horses that are well looked after, and reward the caleche drivers, so they can feed their horses and their families.

True my grammar may be bad, but then your geography is not much better.  Look where the pyramids are in relation to Luxor!


----------



## SusannaF (26 April 2012)

I find it odd that instead of reporting your concerns to the Brooke, you wrote a long post on a public forum on which you've made few posts and in which you repeatedly sing the praises of another charity which could be said to be competing for the same funds.


----------



## quirky (26 April 2012)

Pictorial evidence?
To back up your story ... both of Brooke and ACE?


----------



## charlimouse (26 April 2012)

Your experience seems a little odd to me. My parents whilst out in Egypt visited the Brooke at Cairo (yes I know different place to Luxor) on the 9th April, and had nothing but praise for the charity, facilities and care the animals received. Having seen photos I agree the charity are doing a good job in a very difficult environment, and have therefore increased my donation to them. 

I would be interested to see your photos, and would urge you to contact The Brooke asap.


----------



## Auslander (26 April 2012)

I also feel that your accusations would be more believable if you hadn't posted in various threads about the Brook - urging people to donate to your chosen charity instead. 
If you can provide evidence of bad management at the Brook, then I will apologise wholeheartedly, but at present, this thread smacks of advertising for another charity in the worst possible way; by defaming another.


----------



## canteron (26 April 2012)

I too donate regularly to The Brooke and would love to hear their response to this. I just hope this thread doesn't get pulled before we find out the truth.  Are you sure it was the Brooke hospital or another animal charity?

Anyway, what you saw sounds pretty distressing and would definitely give me nightmares.


----------



## Amymay (26 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			I have not contacted The Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly these are very serious allegations, and I for one wouldn't hesitate to cancel my subscription to them if they would found to be true.

Of course you must contact the Brooke to make a formal complaint, providing them with your pictorial evidence.  A formal investigation will then be launched.  I'd say you had a moral obligation to do so.

The Brooke's Chief Executive is Petra Ingram, and she can be contacted at:  The Brooke,
30 Farringdon St, London, EC4A 4HH, United Kingdom.

You should also make sure that your allegations are copied to the Charities Commission also.

Do let us know how you get on - and what the outcome of the investigation is, so that those of us who do donate to The Brooke can make an informed decision about future donations.


----------



## Goldenstar (26 April 2012)

I am sorry but my something does not make sense here monitor is on red here I feel you have an ulterior motive.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (26 April 2012)

Until you have contacted the Brooke, making a formal complaint and giving them the opportunity that they are entitled to to respond to the allegation, and esp in the light of the promotion of a rival charity, I have to treat the allegation you make extremely warily, without dismissing it out of hand.

Do you not think you should approach the Brooke before you spend your time posting on forums? Would that not be a better way of ensuring as quickly as possible that no more animals are put at risk as you claim this horse was?


----------



## Mithras (26 April 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I am sorry but my something does not make sense here monitor is on red here I feel you have an ulterior motive.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not getting that feeling and I'm normally sceptical as hell.  I've heard similar things said before about some of the Brooke's centres.  The OP is simply posting to make public her concerns, does not seem unreasonable to me either.


----------



## Ceris Comet (26 April 2012)

Post the pics then


----------



## debsg (26 April 2012)

You are making these serious allegations on a public forum, but what are YOU (with all your photographic evidence) going to actually do about it?
YOU have visited the centre in Luxor.
YOU have taken the photographs.
YOU are apparently in the confidence of the caleche drivers.
Instead of expecting us to withdraw our donations without clear evidence that something is amiss, why don't YOU step up to the plate and do something about it??
Contact the Brooke's head office, Horse and Hound editorial, etc etc.
When and if the brown stuff hits the fan, and if your allegations are proven to be true, THEN people on here will consider stopping donations to the Brooke.
Put your money where your mouth is, as the old saying goes.................


----------



## Sandstone1 (26 April 2012)

Im very concerned about your claims. Please contact the Brooke direct with your photos etc. It seems very strange that you should post on here before contacting them.


----------



## Sparkles (26 April 2012)

_If_ you have valid photographic proof, then prove it and contact them over here surely and find your answers if it's true.

I wouldn't be posting publically on a forum until an investigation or similar had been carried and I'd be much more subtle about it I know that much, by the time if anyone goes over there to investigate now, then they've got adequate warning to clear loose ends up frankly.


----------



## YasandCrystal (26 April 2012)

Mithras said:



			I'm not getting that feeling and I'm normally sceptical as hell.  I've heard similar things said before about some of the Brooke's centres.  The OP is simply posting to make public her concerns, does not seem unreasonable to me either.
		
Click to expand...

^^ This . I stopped my STO to the Brooke a few months ago due to the many slatings they were getting for not channelling their funds to the horses in need.


----------



## Wagtail (26 April 2012)

My gut reaction to this is that it is blatent defamation of a charity for the purpose of promoting another. If I am wrong then I apologise. But say you are 100% right and this did indeed happen, then all I can see is that the vet concerned needs dismissing and replacing by someone more competent and who cares more. It does not mean the whole charity 'causes suffering to animals'. IF this acccount is correct then you should be informing the Brooke themselves and only once they have had a chance to respond, put it on a public forum.


----------



## xspiralx (26 April 2012)

These are incredibly serious allegations as I'm sure you're aware.

If they are true, you absolutely must contact The Brooke directly with this report and evidence, as there is no doubt that what you witnessed is in complete breach of their charity mission and objectives. Their head office must be informed and given the opportunity to address this situation.

If you have photographic evidence you could also contact the press - though personally I would only do this once I had contacted the charity concerned and given them the chance to respond to the situation.

I imagine this thread will be pulled for being defamatory, but if you want people to believe you, posting the photos would be a good start.

If you are lying, and this is an attempt to garner donations for the ACE, then I would stop immediately. I'm sure the ACE would be absolutely horrified if you were slandering The Brooke in an attempt to gain more donations for them. Not only would you be associating them with lying and public mud slinging (which I'm sure they would not thank you for), but ultimately, both charities exist to protect animals from suffering, and any rivalry comes secondary to this overall goal. The last thing any charity wants is less support for its cause, even if a larger proportion of donations are going to other organisations.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Auslander said:



			I also feel that your accusations would be more believable if you hadn't posted in various threads about the Brook - urging people to donate to your chosen charity instead. 
If you can provide evidence of bad management at the Brook, then I will apologise wholeheartedly, but at present, this thread smacks of advertising for another charity in the worst possible way; by defaming another.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for your responses.  I will try and reply to all your concerns.  I thought I had NOT repeatedly urged people to donate to another charity instead.  I was trying to point out that another charity, with far less monies, had better facilities than The Brooke.  Should this not be starting alarm bells?  

I do have photographs, of both ACE and The Brooke.  There was no intention of slagging off The Brooke, and trying to promote other charities, my first and foremost concern is the level of care the animals are receiving out there.  Not even putting this animal to sleep causes me grave concern.  I did not provide any link to OTHER  charities out in Luxor, if you want to look up the one I mentioned you can easily google it.

Providing evidence of bad management at The Brooke?  I am not commenting on heresay, I actually saw the horse shortly after it had been hit, and then returned later.  The vet? was very surprised to see me later on in the day.  I suppose most tourists who do visit, don't return later on in the same day as I did to check up on an animal.

I am saddened that many post are very sceptical of my claims, I am reporting on what my husband and I witnessed on that day.  I appreciate that The Brooke are a major charity, and what they are doing in other countries I cannot comment about.  However, the centre in Luxor is causing suffering to animals.  The horse concerned, who is to say it didn't have multiple fractures?  It was hit by a bus.  I am concerned that  maybe the vet did not recognise them.  Certainly the dog which was brought to 'the other charity' had broken bones, and they were not recognised.

The Brooke have said they will look into my claims.  However they have recently stated, that they have no vehicles out in Luxor, and they do I have seen them.  So that makes ME very sceptical.

My first and foremost aim is that when animals are admitted to The Brooke in Luxor they are provided with better care, and if their injuries are very severe they are put to sleep.

Its very easy to come home and do nothing about what I saw.  I have contacted a number of the newspapers to highlight my story - I am trying to do something about it.


----------



## xspiralx (26 April 2012)

Can I ask if there is a particular reason you are unwilling to share the photographs here?


----------



## Amymay (26 April 2012)

The Brooke have said they will look into my claims
		
Click to expand...

So you've been in touch to the CE, in writing and provided the photos?  That's great news.

I also don't think you've repeatedly urged people to donate to another charity.  You've merely asked us to think about it as you consider them to have done such good work.

As for the papers - perhaps a little premature until the Brooke investigation is concluded.


----------



## riding_high (26 April 2012)

just wondering if you got photos of the vehicles the brooke have out there? if you do and it's obviously their vehicles and they say they don't have any then yes they are being a bit 'odd'.
on the other hand maybe they aren't the brookes vehicles but other people have provided them and put the logos on but they still own them rather than donating to the brooke.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Regarding the photographs, I have many of 'the other charity', but they can easily be accessed online.

Re the photograph of the horse at The Brooke, is only reason I have not posted it, is that my computer skills are not up to it!!  I would have to get my daughter round to help me with that one.  I did not know my husband had taken a photo while we were there, its one of those things you are so upset, and I did shed many tears that day.  I could have easily not gone to see the horse, infact at first I did refuse.  However I am pleased I did put myself through the ordeal, as I want the personnel there thoroughly investigated.  

If the only way many of you will believe me is to see photographic evidence, I can ask my daughter to post it online for you to view.  Don't doubt me, it does exist.


----------



## Amymay (26 April 2012)

Can you confirm that you have written to the CE of Brooke, with your complaint?


----------



## Amymay (26 April 2012)

amymay said:



			Can you confirm that you have written to the CE of Brooke, with your complaint?
		
Click to expand...

I guess that's a no then.........................


----------



## xspiralx (26 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			If the only way many of you will believe me is to see photographic evidence, I can ask my daughter to post it online for you to view.  Don't doubt me, it does exist.
		
Click to expand...

Please do - it would be very helpful.


amymay - I would imagine she has not, but then it is very unlikely that the Chief Exec would be the best person to try and contact regarding this anyway. Any mail to the CE would probably go straight to the supporter services team, who would then refer it on to the most appropriate department. Hopefully the OP has at least sent the photographs of the horse and the cars to add credence to her claims.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Just because I don't reply to your post straight away does not mean the answer is a NO!!
I do have a life, and can't sit at the computer all day, I have horses of my own to see too, work and family commitments.

I don't have a photograph of the vehicles, I do of the horse concerned.  If you prefer to disbelieve me than fair enough.  After all from the comfort of your own home, you can bury your head in the sand and believe it doesn't exist.  

I mean I can get my daughter to cut and paste or whatever you do to load a photograph, but if you disbelieve me in the first place, how are you to know the photograph I have of the horse, is the one I am posting about.  It could be from anywhere.

Its not just me that experienced this dreadful scene, my husband was there too.  The vehicles are a little irrelevant to the story.  My aim is to stop unnecessary suffering to the animals treated there.


----------



## Ladydragon (26 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			I have not contacted The Brooke.  However they deny they have any vehicles out in Luxor.  As I have seen them with my own eyes, I have no trust in them whatsoever.
		
Click to expand...

But surely, if you have genuine concerns, that would be THE first thing to do 



canteron said:



			I just hope this thread doesn't get pulled before we find out the truth.
		
Click to expand...

I'm surprised it's still standing...



stormalong said:



			Providing evidence of bad management at The Brooke?  I am not commenting on heresay, I actually saw the horse shortly after it had been hit, and then returned later.  The vet? was very surprised to see me later on in the day.  I suppose most tourists who do visit, don't return later on in the same day as I did to check up on an animal.
		
Click to expand...

But everything you have said is anecdotal and uncorroborated in the true sense... That's the point...  You need to start the formal wheels moving to acknowledge the evidence you have and your experiences...  I am not for one minute suggesting that you have pulled this out of your hat but I could say the same on a public forum when in reality I've never been to Egypt...  Scepticism is healthy until something a bit more tangible is available...  I hope you get a prompt reply from the charity and they look at your complaint properly...


----------



## Freddie19 (26 April 2012)

I do hope that this is either overstated or untrue (although I cannot believe someone would spend their time posting defamatory remarks) as I have fundraised for Brooke at times.  Now concentrate on local animal rescue, and try and close my eyes to other advertisements, cannot afford all.


----------



## FionaM12 (26 April 2012)

muddymate said:



			"just ask any of the caleche drivers"
What shall we call YOUR charity? FOECD (Friend Of Egyptian Caleche Drivers)? Why are you swanning around in a caleche in all that heat and obvious danger to horses (that are hit by vehicles etc.)?
I really CANNOT imagine that you would be allowed near the animals in the extreme state that you describe, as a jolly tourist, especially if the organisations in question HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE... 
I will forward a link to this thread to Brooke, even though I am sure that they have much better things to do than deal with than your bad grammar.
Enjoy the rest of your holiday; I understand that half starved horses working in the environs of the pyramids are desperate for more work.
		
Click to expand...

I understand people being sceptical but this response is pretty sarcastic and unpleasant. 

I didn't think the OP's grammar was particularly bad (certainly no worse than muddymate's), but so what if it was? What would that have to do with the case?

It's fair enough that people should question the OP and request more evidence, but surely it can be done with a little less rudeness.


----------



## Orangehorse (26 April 2012)

There is no reason to disbelieve the OP - but the place to take this up is the Brooke, who should investigate.  I can imagine that it is hard to keep tabs on every member of staff and every clinic, but hopefully they will find out what is happening and if the standard of care is less than it should be.


----------



## Hells Bells (26 April 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			I understand people being sceptical but this response is pretty sarcastic and unpleasant. 

I didn't think the OP's grammar was particularly bad (certainly no worse than muddymate's), but so what if it was? What would that have to do with the case?

It's fair enough that people should question the OP and request more evidence, but surely it can be done with a little less rudeness.
		
Click to expand...

^^^ What she said.

The likes of AmyMay, I feel have gone about it the right way, in a nicer manner. I would also like to see the evidence, or at least be comforted that this has been taken up with Brooke, but there is NO need to be as rude as you have been, muddymare.


----------



## Freddie19 (26 April 2012)

I sat and worried over this post, and have just decided to send email to Brooke re post, asking them to read and answer.  Hope to hear from them soon.  I know that this does not mean that OP was telling untruths, but am so worried.


----------



## Amymay (26 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			Just because I don't reply to your post straight away does not mean the answer is a NO!!
I do have a life, and can't sit at the computer all day, I have horses of my own to see too, work and family commitments.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies - you were however on line and reading the post for quite some time after I asked my question (which is still yet to be answered.....)


I also don't disbelieve you.  However I would like confirmation of whom you have officially complained to.


----------



## YasandCrystal (26 April 2012)

Freddie19 said:



			I sat and worried over this post, and have just decided to send email to Brooke re post, asking them to read and answer.  Hope to hear from them soon.  I know that this does not mean that OP was telling untruths, but am so worried.
		
Click to expand...

The Brooke have answered posts on here in the past - so this should be interesting.


----------



## Janah (26 April 2012)

I am going to Luxor next week.  Two of my sisters live there.  One of whom has adopted cats from ACE and received nothing but good advice.  I am taking adhesive bandages and fly fringes with me this time.

I don't think that bashing one charity from another ultimetly from another helps anyone.  Obviously if one has real concerns then they should be aired.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Sorry amymay if I did not answer all of your question.

I have written via email to The Brooke.  I have searched for a direct contact email for their CE but can't find it.  However, I have emailed the society directly.

Re the photograph, no I haven't sent it, due to my computer skills not being up to it. However like I say, it is on our digital camera, and it can be posted.

Someone yesterday also sent a link to The Brooke's Facebook page for me, they replied that they would investigate for me.

I appreciate many people don't believe my claims.  To prove I was there - I also made a donation of 100LE whilst there, and I have a written receipt, signed with the date.

I also made sure I wrote in the visitor book mentioning the stricken horse, hoping it made a full recovery.  (This was the first time I visited in the morning). In the afternoon the visitor book was not available!


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Janah - if you are going out next week is there any chance you can take photographs of The Brooke and its facilities.  The vehicles were all parked inside the compound.  
However in all honesty its the ability of the vet there that I question, and why I am posting my concerns.


----------



## ribbons (26 April 2012)

I think it's quite likely everything OP has said is accurate. Sadly all large charities of any kind contain a certain amount of  lazy uncaring people who's only thought is to themselves and their pockets. That is the problem when they get so big, not every one is there for the right reasons. Unfortunately the smaller and more dedicated charities do not carry the same clout world wide. It's a rock and a hard place situation as to where to donate your hard earned contribution.


----------



## mightymammoth (26 April 2012)

SusannaF said:



			I find it odd that instead of reporting your concerns to the Brooke, you wrote a long post on a public forum on which you've made few posts and in which you repeatedly sing the praises of another charity which could be said to be competing for the same funds.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure they are doing the best they can and they are better than nothing? I no longer donate to them (as only want my donation going to the animals and not to people) but have changed to SPANA


----------



## moana (26 April 2012)

I am not going to comment on your claims, but do want to know WHY you were using one of these horse drawn vehicles, adding to their overwork and stress needlessly.


----------



## stencilface (26 April 2012)

moana said:



			I am not going to comment on your claims, but do want to know WHY you were using one of these horse drawn vehicles, adding to their overwork and stress needlessly.
		
Click to expand...

Thats a catch 22 though isn't it?  If they can't earn money through tourists they'll just either a) not be able to feed their horses or b) make them do some much harder labour either in the fields or the brick kilns.  Rewarding good ownership with patronage is a good thing to do.  Me and the OH rode horses to the pyramids when we went, yes they weren't UK 'show condition' but they were not emaciated, and were well looked after. (although in my naivety I didn't see under the saddles - this was 8 years ago).

Many of the people don't want to be cruel to their animals, but in a country where there is no free healthcare of anything else for people, how can you expect their horses to be cared for as well as ours if they don't have money?


----------



## Goldenstar (26 April 2012)

Stencilface said:



			Thats a catch 22 though isn't it?  If they can't earn money through tourists they'll just either a) not be able to feed their horses or b) make them do some much harder labour either in the fields or the brick kilns.  Rewarding good ownership with patronage is a good thing to do.  Me and the OH rode horses to the pyramids when we went, yes they weren't UK 'show condition' but they were not emaciated, and were well looked after. (although in my naivety I didn't see under the saddles - this was 8 years ago).

Many of the people don't want to be cruel to their animals, but in a country where there is no free healthcare of anything else for people, how can you expect their horses to be cared for as well as ours if they don't have money? 

Click to expand...

It is catch 22 I have lived in a developing country and its a dilemma you had to deal with all the time I still don't know what's the right thing to do.


----------



## Taffyhorse (26 April 2012)

I think that the correct and right course of action in this case would be to contact the Brooke directly (which you say you have) and the Charities Commission if you have a complaint to make. 

You should be (or may be already) aware that by posting this on a public forum, it could be viewed as defamatory and could also jeopordise any future investigation. 

I am deeply saddened by what you say (particularly as I support the Brooke) but I also work for a large NGO and some of the allegations that have been levelled at us beggar belief!! I don't necessarily disbelieve you but if you want to prevent the situation that you witnessed re-ocurring then complaining to the Brooke and the Charities Commission is the way forward - not posting comments on a public forum that could potentially land you in hot water.


----------



## Mithras (26 April 2012)

Taffyhorse said:



			I think that the correct and right course of action in this case would be to contact the Brooke directly (which you say you have) and the Charities Commission if you have a complaint to make.
		
Click to expand...

Thats a good point.  Charities registered in this country get an awful lot by way of tax breaks.  They are subject therefore to stringent conditions governing their modus operandi.  I do not think therefore that it is unreasonable to question the activites of a charity.  Sometimes things find their way out anecdotally first.  Charities are in the public eye and can reasonably expect public criticism when they are seen not to function, if indeed that is the case. 

OP - I should think writing to the Charities Commissioner, with some of your evidence, would be worthwhile.



Taffyhorse said:



			You should be (or may be already) aware that by posting this on a public forum, it could be viewed as defamatory and could also jeopordise any future investigation.
		
Click to expand...

Veracity is always a defence to defamation, and the OP states that she has evidence.  I doubt that we are talking about a criminal investigation here, so I find it unlikely that any investigation by the appropriate body (the Charities Commission) will be jeapardised.


----------



## stormalong (26 April 2012)

Moana - in reply to your question on why we use the caleches at all - we only ever use the good ones.  Its like all things in life - they are not all bad.  The horse we use, we have known for 6 years now.  Every year we return to Luxor he looks well, even in the revolution when there was no work at all.  I went out last November to visit, and to see how the horses were.  Yes some of them were very thin, but Rambo - he looked the same as usual.
His owner knows having a nice horse brings him in far more revenue.  He is not the only good horse out in Luxor, there are many more.  However, go in the backstreets and you will see many horses not so fortunate.  

To everyone who has viewed my post, and replied to it, thank you for your constructive comments.  I had not thought about contacting the Charities Commission, but will do so.

The Brooke have replied to me and asked for a description of the vet in question.  My daughter has also helped me to upload some photographs taken on the day, including one of the horse that died.


----------



## Happy Horse (26 April 2012)

When I went to Egypt, we were encouraged to use the Caleches which had the well cared for horses because this encourages the owners of the poorer horses to improve their care. Some of the owners were incredibly proud of thei animals and carriages. I hope the Brooke situation is investigated as I saw them doing great work (although it was a long time ago I was there!)


----------



## debsg (26 April 2012)

To the OP, I posted this morning, asking what you were doing about this allegation and this evening you have answered my question. You have contacted the Brooke and sent the photographs. Hopefully they will investigate this matter asap. Well done and thanks
xxx


----------



## Parker79 (26 April 2012)

This is obviously a very distressing situation, I hope you get a satisfactory response from The Brooke.

Can you keep us posted...not everyone on here wishes to give you a hard time...I understand that people are skeptical but I agree with others on here that some of the replies on this thread have been extremely rude.

Your post has given me a lot to think about, I also agree with seeking out the working horses that are well cared for and in good condition...I did the same in Italy.


----------



## Honey08 (26 April 2012)

I think the OP has been completely credible from start to finish!  I can't believe people would doubt her.  But then again, those people have probably never been to a third world country and seen suffering - it really could make you so angry that you would come on here  and fire off a thread... It sticks in your mind.. If nothing else, among the accusations there were some useful suggestions on where to go next with the complaint..

OP good luck, and keep us posted.x


----------



## EmmasMummy (26 April 2012)

Is it at all possible that it is a fake charity masquerading as The Brooke?  It coul dbe done.............given that someone has opened a fake Primark in Dubai, then why not a fake charity to rake in cash? 
They may well have the vehicles, but not have been authorised to have them.


----------



## canteron (27 April 2012)

Ok, I for one need to hear from The Brooke now.

Like many others I have a standing order for their works and have raised funds seperately.  I am sure that overall they do a good job - but its time they made a statement on this forum about this particularly situation - if as you say, they have posted on here before?

Please Brooke, I desperately want to believe in you.


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2012)

canteron said:



			Ok, I for one need to hear from The Brooke now.

Like many others I have a standing order for their works and have raised funds seperately.  I am sure that overall they do a good job - but its time they made a statement on this forum about this particularly situation - if as you say, they have posted on here before?

Please Brooke, I desperately want to believe in you.
		
Click to expand...

I can't imagine they're in any position to comment at the moment, until the email has been located and investigation carried out.


----------



## Freddie19 (27 April 2012)

Just to say that I have received email from Brooke this morning to say, that they are shocked and concerned re the remarks made in this post, have contacted their offices in Luzor and investigations are being carried out.  They have said they will keep me informed. If I was a technophobe I would put email on here, but I am afraid I cannot.  I will of course report any other emails back.


----------



## Goldenstar (27 April 2012)

Honey08 said:



			I think the OP has been completely credible from start to finish!  I can't believe people would doubt her.  But then again, those people have probably never been to a third world country and seen suffering - it really could make you so angry that you would come on here  and fire off a thread... It sticks in your mind.. If nothing else, among the accusations there were some useful suggestions on where to go next with the complaint..

OP good luck, and keep us posted.x
		
Click to expand...

Well I lived in one and have seen the work Brooke do and something in the original post did not feel right to me.


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2012)

Freddie19 said:



			Just to say that I have received email from Brooke this morning to say, that they are shocked and concerned re the remarks made in this post, have contacted their offices in Luzor and investigations are being carried out.  They have said they will keep me informed. If I was a technophobe I would put email on here, but I am afraid I cannot.  I will of course report any other emails back.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks Freddie.


----------



## touchstone (27 April 2012)

Have been thinking about this thread quite a bit, and hope that the Brooke are able to respond accordingly.  

Out of interest though, do the vets out there need an owners permission to euthanise a horse?  I just can't help thinking that if permission is required then the owners might rather the horse take its chances than get put down anyway as it will mean they have to find a replacement?


----------



## moana (27 April 2012)

Thank you for your response to my post. I am glad you only use the good ones. This is one of the problems that the charities have to face and deal with. The GOOD ones do need the work.


----------



## Natch (27 April 2012)

Food for thought here. I watch with interest.


----------



## CeeBee (27 April 2012)

Naturally said:



			Food for thought here. I watch with interest.
		
Click to expand...

Same here. I've no reason to disbelieve anything them OP has said, she sounds genuine enough to me. Poor animals


----------



## CeeBee (27 April 2012)

*the* OP


----------



## TheBrooke (27 April 2012)

Thank you to everyone who has commented on the incident that occurred at the Brookes Luxor clinic. We appreciate your concern for working equines in the developing world and we were very concerned by this report. Please be assured we take these situations very seriously and
an internal investigation has been undertaken. 

Our General Manager in Egypt has now sent over a report and our records show that on Saturday 14th April a grey mare was indeed admitted to the Brooke's clinic in Luxor after a car accident. A thorough clinical examination was carried out which revealed lacerated wounds to the right front leg and right hind leg. 

The mare was sedated, then the wounded area was shaved and cleaned with antiseptic before an anti-tetanus serum was given. The mare was moved to one of the clinics large boxes and anesthetised to help her lie down on a large mattress, so the vet could begin stitching the wounds. The vets assessment concluded that the best way to know if this animal could make a recovery was to allow it the time to do so. 

Unfortunately in this case the mare died on the same day, from suspected internal organ damage as a result of the car accident, and not from fractured bone or external bleeding. Although she was thoroughly examined on arrival, it was impossible for us to know the extent of the damage at an early stage and our priority was to give the horse an opportunity to respond to the initial treatment.
It is truly sad when any animal dies, despite all our efforts, but in this case we feel we did all we could to help this poor horse and we are sure she would not have been suffering in these final hours.

I would like to reassure you all that our vets in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  I sincerely hope this statement helps clarify some of your concerns. 

We do respect the fact that other organisations have a different approach to us but our mission is to do what is best for the welfare of the largest number of working equine animals. With over 75 years experience, we aim to help communities to look after their own horses and donkeys and so help prevent disease and injury, visiting animals at home in their villages and treating them in a way that meets good clinical standards in addition to the work of our clinics. 

Please note that we will be unable to comment on any posts raised on this forum until after the weekend. In order for us to respond appropriately, if anybody does have any questions, please do contact us directly via info@thebrooke.org. and we will get in touch with you as soon as possible. Thank you.


----------



## rockysmum (27 April 2012)

I have followed this from the start and didn't know what to think.

I think those who did not believe the OP will now have to change their opinion.

As the charity concerned has confirmed the facts there is no reason to doubt the OP at all now.  If she had not been there and seen it, how would she have known.

I hope the charity take this seriously and monitor their clinics more carefully.


----------



## SusannaF (27 April 2012)

rockysmum said:



			I have followed this from the start and didn't know what to think.

I think those who did not believe the OP will now have to change their opinion.

As the charity concerned has confirmed the facts there is no reason to doubt the OP at all now.  If she had not been there and seen it, how would she have known.

I hope the charity take this seriously and monitor their clinics more carefully.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where they have stated that suffering was deliberately caused to an animal in their care, as alleged by the OP?


----------



## YasandCrystal (27 April 2012)

They have not mentionned the dog with the broken legs either and that story really upset me. You don't need xray vision if a dog is that badly injured.  I hope they will investigate thoroughly.


----------



## rockysmum (27 April 2012)

SusannaF said:



			I'm not sure where they have stated that suffering was deliberately caused to an animal in their care, as alleged by the OP?
		
Click to expand...

No, of course not.  But they have confirmed the facts that the horse was there after a road accident and was PTS.

I just dont think the OP would know this if her story was not true.  It would be far too much of a coincidence.


----------



## Natch (27 April 2012)

YasandCrystal said:



			They have not mentionned the dog with the broken legs either and that story really upset me. You don't need xray vision if a dog is that badly injured.  I hope they will investigate thoroughly.
		
Click to expand...

That's the other charity, isn't it? I think they did put him to sleep almost straight away according to the OP.

Dunno what to think now. We clearly have the same incident reported from different perspectives. Did the OP misunderstand what went on? I'm pretty sure you could take a look at some brilliantly run equine hospitals in the UK and find things which you could perceive as deliberate cruelty if you didn't know what was going on. For example I would imagine assisted recovery would look pretty horiffic, where the horse's tail is tied to a corner of the box, winched up high and his head pulled in the other direction for dear life while he gets up, disorientated after an anaesthetic. But its actually a way to try to ensure that horses getting up from after surgery don't do themselves any damage.

Alternatively has the vet involved protected his own back by not telling the whole story? I mean, who's to know, apart from the OP. 




I guess I would now (well, after the weekend) like to hear from the Brooke about:

What measures are in place for prevention of flies, and are they adequate?

Did the horse get into respiratory distress, and if so what action was taken and how quickly was it taken?

What was the level of bleeding /blood loss before and after stitching?

and How frequently are horses who have been anaesthatised, or who have suffered from an injury where internal bleeding is a possibility monitored, and did this happen in this case?


----------



## Goldenstar (27 April 2012)

I never said OP did not see an injured horse I fact the fact that she had pictures and whybwould someone do that .
However I do not accept that the horse was left to suffer it was clearly from her description receiving treatment and badly injured .
In the third world I am am not speaking with knowledge about the brooke but from what I saw when I was living abroad they are not as quick to PTS as we are here, I saw this many times horses were treated handled kindly but nature was left to take its course I don't know if that was what happened here but it may ,we also do not know what the ownership position with this horse did they have the right to PTS we don't know this.
I have seen the Brooke working helping working equines and the help they give makes real differences to horses working in conditions that break your heart but the people are working in these conditions too.
Was the brooke vet rude to OP perhaps if so not a wise thing to do but given the tone of her post I can just imagine how that would have gone down where I was helping.


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2012)

I'm not reassured, The Brooke.


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2012)

OP can ypu get your photos up on this thread please.

Put them on a Photobucket account and then copy the img code on your reply for them to show.


----------



## Custard Cream (27 April 2012)

Well this is worrying. I'm currently fundraising for The Brooke by running the Great North Run......


----------



## shortstuff99 (27 April 2012)

Many Muslims do not believe in euthanasia as they feel it is Allahs's will as to whether the animal survives or not. It may have been the owners choice not to put down immediately. We need to know the whole story before we can judge. I guess this is what the Brooke is trying to do.


----------



## Ladydragon (27 April 2012)

Naturally said:



			I mean, who's to know, apart from the OP.
		
Click to expand...

The vet...  He's the one qualified to make a diagnosis and order treatment - and would know if he was acting appropriately...  Obviously if he wasn't, he's probably going to be less inclined to acknowledge that...

Even someone qualified who has not undertaken a proper examination and reviewed any notes would be hard put in many cases to make an informed decision about care based on a quick viewing...



amymay said:



			I'm not reassured, The Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

I agree...  The post, to me, smacked a little of a 'stock reply'...


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

TheBrooke said:



			Thank you to everyone who has commented on the incident that occurred at the Brooke&#8217;s Luxor clinic. We appreciate your concern for working equines in the developing world and we were very concerned by this report. Please be assured we take these situations very seriously and
an internal investigation has been undertaken. 

Our General Manager in Egypt has now sent over a report and our records show that on Saturday 14th April a grey mare was indeed admitted to the Brooke's clinic in Luxor after a car accident. A thorough clinical examination was carried out which revealed lacerated wounds to the right front leg and right hind leg. 

The mare was sedated, then the wounded area was shaved and cleaned with antiseptic before an anti-tetanus serum was given. The mare was moved to one of the clinic&#8217;s large boxes and anesthetised to help her lie down on a large mattress, so the vet could begin stitching the wounds. The vet&#8217;s assessment concluded that the best way to know if this animal could make a recovery was to allow it the time to do so. 

Unfortunately in this case the mare died on the same day, from suspected internal organ damage as a result of the car accident, and not from fractured bone or external bleeding. Although she was thoroughly examined on arrival, it was impossible for us to know the extent of the damage at an early stage and our priority was to give the horse an opportunity to respond to the initial treatment.
It is truly sad when any animal dies, despite all our efforts, but in this case we feel we did all we could to help this poor horse and we are sure she would not have been suffering in these final hours.

I would like to reassure you all that our vets in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  I sincerely hope this statement helps clarify some of your concerns. 

We do respect the fact that other organisations have a different approach to us but our mission is to do what is best for the welfare of the largest number of working equine animals. With over 75 years experience, we aim to help communities to look after their own horses and donkeys and so help prevent disease and injury, visiting animals at home in their villages and treating them in a way that meets good clinical standards in addition to the work of our clinics. 

Please note that we will be unable to comment on any posts raised on this forum until after the weekend. In order for us to respond appropriately, if anybody does have any questions, please do contact us directly via info@thebrooke.org. and we will get in touch with you as soon as possible. Thank you.
		
Click to expand...

I would be grateful if you could let me know what the cause of death was.

ETA. Suspected is not the same as proven.


----------



## Ladydragon (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			I would be grateful if you could let me know what the cause of death was.

ETA. Suspected is not the same as proven.
		
Click to expand...

I could be wrong but I wouldn't expect a charity to be in a position to autopsy every animal that dies whilst in their clinical care...


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

Ladydragon said:



			I could be wrong but I wouldn't expect a charity to be in a position to autopsy every animal that dies whilst in their clinical care... 

Click to expand...

No, not every animal, but certainly an animal whose medical care has been called into question.


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

Ladydragon said:



			I could be wrong but I wouldn't expect a charity to be in a position to autopsy every animal that dies whilst in their clinical care... 

Click to expand...

This. Complete waste of money that could  be spent helping another animal. They don't even have x-ray equipment for goodness sake, honestly I don't think people have any understanding of what life is like for the animals or the people in these places 

Next time you see your horses, remind them how lucky they are


----------



## Moomin1 (27 April 2012)

Ladydragon said:



			I could be wrong but I wouldn't expect a charity to be in a position to autopsy every animal that dies whilst in their clinical care... 

Click to expand...

Exactly.  I don't think OP is lying when she says she saw the horse laying down etc etc - and was obviously very concerned, but it is very easy without being in receipt of all of the facts to see something and think it looks horrendous. 

It sounds very much to me like the horse was given emergency initial treatment and made as comfortable as possible. It's stitches may well have burst open by the time OP got back, but these things happen - you visit any vet hospital or even human hospital!  As for the flies - yes not great, but not sure it would be entirely avoidable in a hot country.  Even over here we can't protect our injured horses from the flies 100% - all we can do is try and use fly repellant etc etc.

The vet looking blase isn't an indicator of anything.  He is a professional who deals with dying animals every day - he isn't likely to burst into floods of tears over the matter is he?

With regard internal injuries - it is not entirely possible to foresee these problems initially when an animal is brought in.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

rhino said:



			This. Complete waste of money that could  be spent helping another animal. They don't even have x-ray equipment for goodness sake, honestly I don't think people have any understanding of what life is like for the animals or the people in these places 

Next time you see your horses, remind them how lucky they are 

Click to expand...

I think for a charity like the Brooke, good publicity is a necessity. They have the means to conduct an inquiry.
I would not accept an email from a member of staff, thousands of miles away as fact. Call me cynical, but it's a brush off.


----------



## Holly Hocks (27 April 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			Exactly.  I don't think OP is lying when she says she saw the horse laying down etc etc - and was obviously very concerned, but it is very easy without being in receipt of all of the facts to see something and think it looks horrendous. 

It sounds very much to me like the horse was given emergency initial treatment and made as comfortable as possible. It's stitches may well have burst open by the time OP got back, but these things happen - you visit any vet hospital or even human hospital!  As for the flies - yes not great, but not sure it would be entirely avoidable in a hot country.  Even over here we can't protect our injured horses from the flies 100% - all we can do is try and use fly repellant etc etc.

The vet looking blase isn't an indicator of anything.  He is a professional who deals with dying animals every day - he isn't likely to burst into floods of tears over the matter is he?

With regard internal injuries - it is not entirely possible to foresee these problems initially when an animal is brought in.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with this entirely^^^
I was cynical of the OP's initial post - I felt like she was putting the Brooke down in order to promote an alternative charity - it just sounded wrong.
I am a supporter of The Brooke and I pay them a standing order each month.  If it does emerge that neglect has taken place then I will cancel my standing order and donate to another charity instead.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

Holly Hocks said:



			I agree with this entirely^^^
I was cynical of the OP's initial post - I felt like she was putting the Brooke down in order to promote an alternative charity - it just sounded wrong.
I am a supporter of The Brooke and I pay them a standing order each month.  If it does emerge that neglect has taken place then I will cancel my standing order and donate to another charity instead.
		
Click to expand...

and how do think neglect will be established? The testimony of other staff? That would be naive.


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			I think for a charity like the Brooke, good publicity is a necessity. They have the means to conduct an inquiry.
I would not accept an email from a member of staff, thousands of miles away as fact. Call me cynical, but it's a brush off.
		
Click to expand...

Keep stating your opinion as often as you like. It's still just _your opinion_

And yes, I did doubt the OP's motives from the start. I haven't altered _my opinion_


----------



## Honey08 (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			and how do think neglect will be established? The testimony of other staff? That would be naive.
		
Click to expand...

The photos, perhaps?


----------



## Holly Hocks (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			and how do think neglect will be established? The testimony of other staff? That would be naive.
		
Click to expand...

No different from taking the viewpoint of one person (well one and her husband who is unlikely to say anything different to her).  The Brooke have said that they won't be able to comment until after the weekend, so we should see what they come back with....

I suppose I should start considering which other charities I should give my monthly donation to (and it's not that small a donation either!)


----------



## Monkers (27 April 2012)

Good lord, I thought I had seen the worst of people on this forum and am pretty immune to most of the sniping on here, but I am genuinely shocked at the way the OP has been treated by some of you.

Thank you OP for highlighting this issue, It certainly sounds as though this horse did not have the treatment it needed. If it was involved in a car accident it should not have just been stitched up and left unsupervised. The vet should have taken into account there may well have been internal damage, the animal was hit by a car for goodness sake. Any competant vet would be watching the horse like a hawk. 
The response to this by Brooke is wholly unacceptable. I appreciate the charity does not have endless rescoures, but simple 15 minute obs would have picked up internal bleeding.

The OP was merely sharing what she saw, I would have done the same. To ask her to justify herself and "prove" she wasn't lying or working for another charity by showing pictures etc was really appaling. 

Good for you OP.

I now look forward to having my spelling and grammer criticised and the speculation as to whether or not I am the OP's mother/ daughter/bestmate.....


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

rhino said:



			Keep stating your opinion as often as you like. It's still just _your opinion_

And yes, I did doubt the OP's motives from the start. I haven't altered _my opinion_[/QUO

That's a pity. I haven't accepted the OPs statement as fact, nor have I have accepted The Brookes explanation, not without further evidence.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## ester (27 April 2012)

Naturally the op said the dog had been taken to the brooke the day before and it was sent home. Ace PTS the following day.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

Honey08 said:



			The photos, perhaps?
		
Click to expand...

despite common belief, the camera is very good at lying.


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			That's a pity. I haven't accepted the OPs statement as fact, nor have I have accepted The Brookes explanation, not without further evidence.
		
Click to expand...

Why is it a pity? Have I ever said I believe the Brooke verbatim?

The OP is not a regular poster, in 4 years they have made very few posts, with at least two advising potential Brooke supporters about the 'other' charity.

The purpose of the OP seems to be more about the apparent 'wealth' of the Brooke, as compared to the other charity, and less about the welfare. The offices, the posters, the adverts were all discussed _before_ any mention of the animals. Why the balance sheet or the patrons is relevant I simply don't understand. Neglect and abuse are neglect or abuse, does it really matter if the accused neglecters or abusers have a newer car than another charity?

She's done a very good job of making an awful lot of noise on a busy public forum. Someone with an obvious link to another charity acting in direct competition for funding.

You said you were a cynical person, and so am I. Cynicicm works both ways though.


----------



## Holly Hocks (27 April 2012)

I have just read back to the OP's original post.   Having read it again it does feel to me that she has an agenda.  She has described the charity as "corrupt" - that's quite a serious allegation.  Why feel the need to post about The charity's finances?  If I were concerned about the neglect of an animal, I wouldn't be quoting figures.
Also having read her previous posts - some from 2008, there is quite a lot of mention of ACE, and in fact on one thread about donating to The Brooke, she brings ACE up again.  Sorry, but I continue to remain unconvinced by her apparent concern for the horse.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

Holly Hocks said:



			I have just read back to the OP's original post.   Having read it again it does feel to me that she has an agenda.  She has described the charity as "corrupt" - that's quite a serious allegation.  Why feel the need to post about The charity's finances?  If I were concerned about the neglect of an animal, I wouldn't be quoting figures.
Also having read her previous posts - some from 2008, there is quite a lot of mention of ACE, and in fact on one thread about donating to The Brooke, she brings ACE up again.  Sorry, but I continue to remain unconvinced by her apparent concern for the horse.
		
Click to expand...

I too, remain concerned. As you point out, the OP has made serious allegations against the Brooke. The Brooke, as a well known and successful charity needs to defend itself with appropriate evidence. A few emails back and forth to the vet in charge doesn't cut it. Cause of death would.


----------



## touchstone (27 April 2012)

shortstuff99 said:



			Many Muslims do not believe in euthanasia as they feel it is Allahs's will as to whether the animal survives or not. It may have been the owners choice not to put down immediately. We need to know the whole story before we can judge. I guess this is what the Brooke is trying to do.
		
Click to expand...

This is what I was trying to get to the bottom of before as to whether the vet needed the owners permission re pts.   

Following the Brookes version it all sounds quite plausible, providing the horse received analgesia and so was not in pain, there may not have been much more they could do under the circumstances


----------



## mulledwhine (27 April 2012)

I always thought Brooke was too good to be true!!! Not saying they do not help, but this has confirmed everything I thought


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (27 April 2012)

rhino said:



			Why is it a pity? Have I ever said I believe the Brooke verbatim?

The OP is not a regular poster, in 4 years they have made very few posts, with at least two advising potential Brooke supporters about the 'other' charity.

The purpose of the OP seems to be more about the apparent 'wealth' of the Brooke, as compared to the other charity, and less about the welfare. The offices, the posters, the adverts were all discussed _before_ any mention of the animals. Why the balance sheet or the patrons is relevant I simply don't understand. Neglect and abuse are neglect or abuse, does it really matter if the accused neglecters or abusers have a newer car than another charity?

She's done a very good job of making an awful lot of noise on a busy public forum. Someone with an obvious link to another charity acting in direct competition for funding.

You said you were a cynical person, and so am I. Cynicicm works both ways though.
		
Click to expand...

The OPs motive could well be suspect but equally, the reply from The Brooke doesn't satisfy me either.


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

mulledwhine said:



			I always thought Brooke was too good to be true!!! Not saying they do not help, but this has confirmed everything I thought 

Click to expand...

It hasn't confirmed *anything* though, it is one persons word alone, a person who didn't even bother to contact the charity itself for *12 days* and then only when prompted to on here.


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			The OPs motive could well be suspect but equally, the reply from The Brooke doesn't satisfy me either.
		
Click to expand...

Have you received the email from them which contains further information?


----------



## mle22 (27 April 2012)

All I know is that I will be continuing my standing order to the Brooke.


----------



## silu (27 April 2012)

I was in Luxor last year and what I witnessed re the carriage/Caleche horses is perhaps beyond what most horse lovers who contribute to these forums could imagine.Prior to my visit I had been well warned about the plight of the majority of the horses, despite the warning, I was totally shocked at their condition and how they were handled. How any tourist took pleasure from a carriage ride being pulled by a near death horse was beyond my belief.
Upon my return to the UK, through Tripadvisor I found out about ACE which is a favoured tourist attraction in Luxor...very little mention of The Brooke!
I contacted ACE and they agreed with me that at a major tourist site outside Luxor the horses were in such a state that the best solution would be to put ALL of them to sleep. I am no tree hugger type yet was reduced to tears at these horses plight and refused to ride in a carriage up to a temple and boycotted the site. I had a VERY miserable day and will NEVER forget what I witnessed. ACE also advised me that many of the Caleche owners  keep these horses in a near death state on purpose to tug on the heart strings of tourists...horses being used as "professional beggars". What the OP wrote unfortunately has a ring of truth to me having been out in Egypt recently.
I sent a donation to ACE post my return from Egypt. It is run by mainly British people I think (not sure of my facts). All I do know is that our delightful Egyptian tour guide was AMAZED at our reaction to the plight of the horses and it took many hours of talking to him to get him to begin to understand how we feel animals should be treated in comparison to the majority of Egyptians. That said there is real poverty in Egypt and to a small extent the situation could be excused, however there isn't a lack of water around!...yes even the basics of survival are not regularly given to the majority of Caleche horses.
With a great deal of effort I obtained The Egyptian head of tourism's email address and contacted him with regard to what a wonderful country Egypt is, however the only terrible downside to my holiday was the state of the Caleche horses which surely must negatively impact on other tourists, not just me?....I am waiting for a reply. As mentioned by a previous poster Spana does wonderful work with working equines abroad and I believe won a prestigious award in America recently but perhaps isn't as well known as it should be! 
I truly hope there is a thorough investigation into The Brooke in Luxor and any improvements made swiftly should they be necessary. Unfortunately it isn't always the well known/heralded charities which actually make big differences.


----------



## MileAMinute (27 April 2012)

rhino said:



			It hasn't confirmed *anything* though, it is one persons word alone, a person who didn't even bother to contact the charity itself for *12 days* and then only when prompted to on here.
		
Click to expand...

And this is why this whole thread smacks of suspicion...!


----------



## Goldenstar (27 April 2012)

Holly Hocks said:



			I agree with this entirely^^^
I was cynical of the OP's initial post - I felt like she was putting the Brooke down in order to promote an alternative charity - it just sounded wrong.
I am a supporter of The Brooke and I pay them a standing order each month.  If it does emerge that neglect has taken place then I will cancel my standing order and donate to another charity instead.
		
Click to expand...

Just remember the alternative is dieing in the street .
The rules are just so different I saw a lamintic die I assume eventully of blood poisoning it took days it was awful but they don't PTS its another world.
( be clear I am not saying that what happened in this case) the horse may well have died of an internal injury causing bleeding and before anyone says they should have remember Ryan's Son died in his stable following a fall at hickstead and they will have had great equine vets there.


----------



## Penny Less (27 April 2012)

Dont know about this particular case, but must admit that despite always wanting to go to Egypt because of the history there, I will not go because I know that I would not be able to cope with the state of the horses there.  Because of the recent troubles there and lack of tourists etc. I have read that many horses are being left to starve. People in other countries use their animals as we would use cars, they have to work no matter what their condition. They dont seem to grasp that if they kept the animals in good condition they would be able to work longer.   Although we have our own cruelty problems in this country animals by and large are much better off than many other countries.


----------



## Dolcé (27 April 2012)

I'm afraid that the reply from the Brooke didn't convince me.  FWIW I recently cancelled my subscription to an equine charity and will never donate again to one.  Recent events have pretty much convinced me that they are all as bad as each other and I will in future spend the money on my own horses.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (27 April 2012)

They might do some good but I dont support them  personally I only support World  Horse Welfare and SPANA


----------



## Honey08 (27 April 2012)

Egypt is a pretty shocking country when it comes to animal welfare.  Perhaps one of the worst I have been to, even before the troubles.  Next time I get a Egypt trip rostered I am going to go out and visit Brooke and form my own opinion. I already have a slight sway to my opinion..

I don't think its that strange that the OP didn't do anything for 12 days - hello - its called a holiday, and she said she was a technaphobe, so probably doesn't have a laptop.  I wouldn't use a public computer for anything in Egypt...

Some people on here are determined to be suspicious!

There is absolutely no chance of any investigation into the cause of death.  Its a pauper's horse in a skint country that died two weeks ago - it will be long gone...  Photos and emails are the only way of solving this really..

I feel sad that lots of people are about to cancel their donations.  They are far from perfect, but do a lot of good work.  Even if this scenario is true (not judgeing either way), they tried (a bit) and the alternative was the horse dying in the street without any attempt of help at all...


----------



## rhino (27 April 2012)

Honey08 said:



			I don't think its that strange that the OP didn't do anything for 12 days - hello - its called a holiday, and she said she was a technaphobe, so probably doesn't have a laptop.  I wouldn't use a public computer for anything in Egypt...
		
Click to expand...

Yet she managed to contact all the papers...


----------



## Goldenstar (27 April 2012)

alma said:



			Dont know about this particular case, but must admit that despite always wanting to go to Egypt because of the history there, I will not go because I know that I would not be able to cope with the state of the horses there.  Because of the recent troubles there and lack of tourists etc. I have read that many horses are being left to starve. People in other countries use their animals as we would use cars, they have to work no matter what their condition. They dont seem to grasp that if they kept the animals in good condition they would be able to work longer.   Although we have our own cruelty problems in this country animals by and large are much better off than many other countries.
		
Click to expand...

You just can't comprehend the poverty until you have seen it.


----------



## rockysmum (28 April 2012)

I think its really sad that people are threatening to cancel donations.  The loosers will be the poor animals in countries like this.

If it turns out that this clinic is not doing a good job, then it need putting right, new management and better monitoring from the charity.

Nothing is perfect and I'm sure this is not unusual for charities.  Perhaps they picked the wrong employees.

I personally will judge the charity on how they put this right and not beat them up about how it happened.


----------



## stormalong (28 April 2012)

Thank you for all your replies.  Yes I feel very deflated at the ones that don't believe what I witnessed that day.  Maybe in retrospect I should not have mentioned the other charity I visited that day.  However, I just tell it how it is.  I was on my way to the other charity, I did witness a dog brought in with 2 broken legs, that had previously been taken to The Brooke.

I have not asked for people to change where they donate, it is up to them to chose.

I love horses, I have three of my own, and recently I had to have one of them put to sleep and it broke my heart.  However I realise I did not let her suffer, and difficult as it is to make that decision, at least I know she did not suffer.  

I was on holiday, I did not want my heart broken that day, and to see a horse in such distress.  All I want for this, is better care at The Brooke, I feel the vet was negligent, and I don't want this to continue.

The Brooke have replied to me, very much the same as the reply posted on the forum.  They add a few additional items.  Namely that the second time I visited the horse, it was on straw, with mats surrounding it.  There was no straw in the stable, and the mats had been moved.

They state the horse was not losing large amounts of blood.  It was.  They say it died of suspected internal organ damage. So this is speculation also.  They do state they do not have expensive equipment like x-ray machines.

However, my main aim of this posting is that I believe the horse should not have been left to suffer.  Good nursing does not cost alot.  The vet should have been monitoring its vital signs every 15 minutes.  Checking its heart rate to monitor pain, also its respiration would have given an indication that his horse was dying.  After all it died 15 minutes after I left.
It breathing was very laboured - a horse's respiration should be in the region of 10-20 breaths a minute.  My husband describes its breathing like a hot dog - it was panting.

Their reply to me regarding the dog, was that it was not a working animal!

To those of you asking me to post  the photographs I have sent to The Brooke.  I spoke to my daughter last night, in fact she helped me send the photographs to them.  I told her about calls to post them online.  Her feelings were much like mine.  The photgraph of the horse is not good viewing.  It is sad that you will only believe me if you can view a picture of a horse hit by a bus.  You hear of people taking photographs of serious road traffic accidents and then posting them online.  There are some people who want to view such things, its not something I want to encourage.

To those of you who doubt me, at least you sleep at night.  For me I have the knowledge of what I saw, and from the look of the reply sent to me by The Brooke, nothing out there is going to change.  Vets also have to have compassion - that man did not show any.   He stitched up its wounds, and left it in the stable.  When I saw it the second time I knew it was going to die, no horse could survive the amount of blood it was losing.

I just feel the amount of donations they receive, they should be giving better care to the animals out in Luxor.


----------



## Ladydragon (28 April 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			No, not every animal, but certainly an animal whose medical care has been called into question.
		
Click to expand...

Given the time delay, I would imagine that would be too late to have undertaken any autopsy once the OP alerted the head office...  Being blunt, in the heat, a body needs to be dealt with very quickly...  



Honey08 said:



			The photos, perhaps?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying photos have no validity... But a vet is unlikely to be able to look at a photograph and give a diagnosis, prognosis or evaluation of care with any accuracy...  A picture of a prone animal could be recently dead, dying or having a nap...



rhino said:



			Have you received the email from them which contains further information?
		
Click to expand...

Their post didn't bowl me over I must admit - pretty quick for a full investigation and it just seemed (to me) to be a bit of a stock reply...  Having said that, I don't see any obvious way to prove or disprove an allegation of substandard (within that environment not compared to what we would expect at our own equine hospitals) care...


----------



## Moomin1 (28 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			Thank you for all your replies.  Yes I feel very deflated at the ones that don't believe what I witnessed that day.  Maybe in retrospect I should not have mentioned the other charity I visited that day.  However, I just tell it how it is.  I was on my way to the other charity, I did witness a dog brought in with 2 broken legs, that had previously been taken to The Brooke.

I have not asked for people to change where they donate, it is up to them to chose.

I love horses, I have three of my own, and recently I had to have one of them put to sleep and it broke my heart.  However I realise I did not let her suffer, and difficult as it is to make that decision, at least I know she did not suffer.  

I was on holiday, I did not want my heart broken that day, and to see a horse in such distress.  All I want for this, is better care at The Brooke, I feel the vet was negligent, and I don't want this to continue.

The Brooke have replied to me, very much the same as the reply posted on the forum.  They add a few additional items.  Namely that the second time I visited the horse, it was on straw, with mats surrounding it.  There was no straw in the stable, and the mats had been moved.

They state the horse was not losing large amounts of blood.  It was.  They say it died of suspected internal organ damage. So this is speculation also.  They do state they do not have expensive equipment like x-ray machines.

However, my main aim of this posting is that I believe the horse should not have been left to suffer.  Good nursing does not cost alot.  The vet should have been monitoring its vital signs every 15 minutes.  Checking its heart rate to monitor pain, also its respiration would have given an indication that his horse was dying.  After all it died 15 minutes after I left.
It breathing was very laboured - a horse's respiration should be in the region of 10-20 breaths a minute.  My husband describes its breathing like a hot dog - it was panting.

Their reply to me regarding the dog, was that it was not a working animal!

To those of you asking me to post  the photographs I have sent to The Brooke.  I spoke to my daughter last night, in fact she helped me send the photographs to them.  I told her about calls to post them online.  Her feelings were much like mine.  The photgraph of the horse is not good viewing.  It is sad that you will only believe me if you can view a picture of a horse hit by a bus.  You hear of people taking photographs of serious road traffic accidents and then posting them online.  There are some people who want to view such things, its not something I want to encourage.

To those of you who doubt me, at least you sleep at night.  For me I have the knowledge of what I saw, and from the look of the reply sent to me by The Brooke, nothing out there is going to change.  Vets also have to have compassion - that man did not show any.   He stitched up its wounds, and left it in the stable.  When I saw it the second time I knew it was going to die, no horse could survive the amount of blood it was losing.

I just feel the amount of donations they receive, they should be giving better care to the animals out in Luxor.
		
Click to expand...

If you don't feel comfortable posting the photo on the thread, you are more than welcome to post the pics to me - I deal with suffering animals daily.  It will not in any way offend me and I can deal with such sights! 

I can then vouch on this thread that what I have seen correlates with your OP.  

FWIW, I wouldn't feel uncomfortable posting distressing photos on here if it was to help animal welfare in the long term, and I have plenty of distressing pics to hand!


----------



## stormalong (28 April 2012)

I have sent the photographs to The Brooke as they requested.  If you want to view them, contact them.


----------



## Moomin1 (28 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			I have sent the photographs to The Brooke as they requested.  If you want to view them, contact them.
		
Click to expand...

Sadly, they will not disclose them, as it is now an internal investigation.

It was just a suggestion - although I imagine there's nothing conclusive evidentially in your pics because a horse merely laying down with burst stitches doesn't mean an awful lot in a picture.


----------



## stormalong (28 April 2012)

Can't sleep!  

The Brooke in their reply to me state they do not have an x-ray machine, and I know the only diagnostics they have in Luxor is the vet.

It seems such a shame that the other charity, just 3 minutes by car down the road has x-ray, ultrasound and endoscope facilities.  The Brooke have 3 large 4x4 open backed transit vehicles, why do they not refer animals to the other place?  At the end of the day our first and foremost concern is for the welfare of  animals.  In Egypt they don't use horse trailers, its quite bazaar, they stand the animals up in the back of a transit, or transport it on the back of a cart pulled by a donkey.  I know politics take place between charities, but surely some arrangement could be agreed upon.  

Re previous questions on post mortems on the horse.  I did go to The Brooke, the day after the horse died.  It was no longer there.  I believe when a horse dies over there they are transported out to the desert.


----------



## Ladydragon (28 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			It seems such a shame that the other charity, just 3 minutes by car down the road has x-ray, ultrasound and endoscope facilities.  The Brooke have 3 large 4x4 open backed transit vehicles, why do they not refer animals to the other place?
		
Click to expand...

It's late, I'm tired...and confused...

If the other charity are lucky enough to have the equipment, have they offered the use of it to The Brook?  Or are you suggesting that The Brook should refer their clinical cases into the care of the better equipped charity?  Or 'buy in' use of the other charity's equipment?


----------



## hairycob (28 April 2012)

Quote:
Originally Posted by stormalong  
It seems such a shame that the other charity, just 3 minutes by car down the road has x-ray, ultrasound and endoscope facilities. The Brooke have 3 large 4x4 open backed transit vehicles, why do they not refer animals to the other place? 


It's all still a bit "he said, she said" to be able to know what actually happened with trhis horse, but the description of the facilities available at ACE does seem a bit "hmm" to me. I just feel that they may be there more to attract western donations than because they are of any real use.
I know these are facilities that in the UK we would expect any equine practice to have, but in this context they actually feel like expensive luxuries. Huge advances in equine welfare can be be made by improving education in things like tack, farriery & basic management and also by providing shaded rest & watering areas for the caleche horses. If a working animal in Egypt is in need of advanced diagnostics it's highly unlikely that the owner will have the resources to rest/rehab the animal & the chances are it will either die or be put back to work whatever. For goodness sake - these are people who are likely to have to choose, at least at quiet times, between feeding their kids or their horse. It may be that The Brooke are making a hard, but perfectly sensible decision, that these are not sensible things to spende money on. I've been to Luxor, I haven't been to any equine charities. I have seen the shaded rest & watering areas they provide & it's easy to see, on a day when the temp is well over 100c what a difference they make every day to the lives of these horses.

If you've ever been to Egypt - and Luxor is actually one of the better areas for horse welfare - you will have seen enough horrifying sights to last you a lifetime by the end of your first day. I actually hung out of a minibus window yelling at some tourists about to get into a caleche pulled by a skeletal chestnut mare, covered in sores, eyes so dull it made me want to cry (& hell, I'm no softy). The tour guide suggested that, being Italian, they probably wouldn't get my Black Beauty reference of "Remember poor Ginger, she is just like her the day she died". Poor thing was far from being the only one we saw like that.


----------



## MurphysMinder (28 April 2012)

shortstuff99 said:



			Many Muslims do not believe in euthanasia as they feel it is Allahs's will as to whether the animal survives or not. It may have been the owners choice not to put down immediately. We need to know the whole story before we can judge. I guess this is what the Brooke is trying to do.
		
Click to expand...

^^^This. My daughter was considering volunteering to work with SPANA.  In the information they sent her they stressed the fact that a lot of owners would not allow euthanasia and the vet would have to be prepared to see a horse taken away which they felt should be pts to prevent further suffering.


----------



## touchstone (28 April 2012)

MurphysMinder said:



			^^^This. My daughter was considering volunteering to work with SPANA.  In the information they sent her they stressed the fact that a lot of owners would not allow euthanasia and the vet would have to be prepared to see a horse taken away which they felt should be pts to prevent further suffering.

Click to expand...

Exactly!   I think that under the circumstances this horse probably had a better death than many experience; at least it received some treatment and went in the quiet of the hospital.  Of course it is far from ideal, but this is Egypt, not the UK.  As for the vet not showing compassion, I think that you do become hardened to sights like this and have to switch off to a degree or else you'd drive yourself mad.  

I don't think that the Brooke have done anything wrong in this instance.


----------



## Amymay (28 April 2012)

I want the photos posted as this will go some way to clear up the contradictory response posted on here by the Brooke.

I'm not sure why you now won't post them op after starting this concerning post.


----------



## Hedgewitch13 (28 April 2012)

I'm afraid a charity that doesn't euth a horse in the state the OP described will certainly not get any of my money. So much for helping suffering! Allah's will or not no animal deserves that when they could have been pts in a dignified manner. Disgusting.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 April 2012)

Hedgewitch13 said:



			I'm afraid a charity that doesn't euth a horse in the state the OP described will certainly not get any of my money. So much for helping suffering! Allah's will or not no animal deserves that when they could have been pts in a dignified manner. Disgusting.
		
Click to expand...

You are transferring your values built up in your society to a foreign country you just can't do that unless you think that no charity's should try to do anything over there , the not PTS thing is terrible it freaked me out completly but it's there culture their rules you either do nothing or do your best doing what you can.


----------



## touchstone (28 April 2012)

Hedgewitch13 said:



			I'm afraid a charity that doesn't euth a horse in the state the OP described will certainly not get any of my money. So much for helping suffering! Allah's will or not no animal deserves that when they could have been pts in a dignified manner. Disgusting.
		
Click to expand...

I agree it is unfair not to pts, but you've got to consider that if they start putting down the horses that we normally would, then the people will probably stop using and trusting them, which leaves the animal worse off.  If the animals last moments can be made pain free and as comfortable as possible (which is what we do with people!) then they are doing as much as they can I would think.


----------



## cambrica (28 April 2012)

It is very sad that now on 'googling' The Brooke Hospital that this thread is on the first page of searches. In a climate where charity organisations are struggling to keep donations rolling in, it is distressing to hear that certain posts have been made stating monthly contributions may be cancelled because of this incident. 
Having travelled to Egypt and seen many cases of horses in very poor condition I agree that Luxor is one of the better places unlike Edfu across the river where the image of one poor horse sticks in my mind to this day.
I feel the OP should have contacted The Brooke and received an explanation, should she not have received an acceptable response, then air her views publicly.  Whether or not The Brooke are vindicated the damage has already been done and this could become catastrophic for a charity that ultimately serves to better the welfare of animals in the poorest of places. 
Luckily, I feel, no photo's have been published as it only takes one national tabloid to jump on this story. 
Hopefully The Brooke will carry out a full investigation regarding the conduct of the vet in question as Im not for one moment saying that there is no cause for concern over their actions.


----------



## touchstone (28 April 2012)

cambrica said:



			It is very sad that now on 'googling' The Brooke Hospital that this thread is on the first page of searches. In a climate where charity organisations are struggling to keep donations rolling in, it is distressing to hear that certain posts have been made stating monthly contributions may be cancelled because of this incident. 
Having travelled to Egypt and seen many cases of horses in very poor condition I agree that Luxor is one of the better places unlike Edfu across the river where the image of one poor horse sticks in my mind to this day.
I feel the OP should have contacted The Brooke and received an explanation, should she not have received an acceptable response, then air her views publicly.  Whether or not The Brooke are vindicated the damage has already been done and this could become catastrophic for a charity that ultimately serves to better the welfare of animals in the poorest of places. 
Luckily, I feel, no photo's have been published as it only takes one national tabloid to jump on this story. 
Hopefully The Brooke will carry out a full investigation regarding the conduct of the vet in question as Im not for one moment saying that there is no cause for concern over their actions.
		
Click to expand...

I agree it could be very damaging, and sadly the Brooke should have been notified before a public forum.  

From the OP's initial post she says "I FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT THIS POOR ANIMAL WAS NOT EVEN AFFORDED THE VERY BASIC TREATMENT OF BEING PUT TO SLEEP."
So it seems that not euthanising is her biggest problem, but as has been pointed out, if the vet is unable to perform euthanasia then what else could he have done


----------



## cambrica (28 April 2012)

amymay said:



			I want the photos posted as this will go some way to clear up the contradictory response posted on here by the Brooke.

I'm not sure why you now won't post them op after starting this concerning post.
		
Click to expand...

Will you please stop asking for photo's to be posted publicly. A photo of a horse suffering in this way is likely to end up in some trash tabloid paper with no thought as to the damage this can do to animal charities in general. Im sure The Brooke will, after seeing the response, carry out a full investigation. If not then go public.


----------



## cambrica (28 April 2012)

touchstone said:



			I agree it could be very damaging, and sadly the Brooke should have been notified before a public forum.  

From the OP's initial post she says "I FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT THIS POOR ANIMAL WAS NOT EVEN AFFORDED THE VERY BASIC TREATMENT OF BEING PUT TO SLEEP."
So it seems that not euthanising is her biggest problem, but as has been pointed out, if the vet is unable to perform euthanasia then what else could he have done

Click to expand...

/\/\THIS /\/\
I totally agree in our ideal western world, and our 'pet' horse's' would have comfort in that. Religion aside, these animals are a lifeline to these people and are not easily replaced, no horse = starving family. When working in these places, as unbearable as it is, this has to be respected.


----------



## Tinypony (28 April 2012)

The Brooke have clearly stated that they won't be able to provide any more information until after the weekend.
Meanwhile, a thread continues that allows people to post opinions that could potentially damage the charity long-term.  What about innocent until proved guilty?  It's like mass hysteria here, is it something to do with the weather and people not getting out enough?
As said above, if someone posts photos now they could be very damaging and used elsewhere, and all while the charity is unable to respond.  Photos of injured horses give no context or timeframe anyway, so will prove nothing.
For those who want the horse autopsied - get real.  The charity will not have the funds to autopsy every animal that dies while in their care, and anyway, the carcass in question will be long gone.
One person saw one incident that they were unhappy about.  Instead of caring about the long-term future of the charity, they went on to a horse forum with a massive population in order to do... what?  Wind people up and reduce donations is the only conclusion I can come to.
The H+H jury is a worrying thing sometimes.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (28 April 2012)

agreed Tinypony, I've seen perfectly good businesses and reputations damaged on here before, people are so willing to think the worst of something that has being doing good work long before anyone else gave a damn. give The Brooke a chance to properly investigate.


----------



## Honey08 (28 April 2012)

I agree too TP, apart from I think that the OP was probably shocked and upset following what she saw, and came on to offload/ask what to do..

I totally agree with the judge/jury part.  People demanding to see photos/autopsies as though they are solicitors on the case.

This thread should be let lie until more is known/proven.


----------



## Wagtail (28 April 2012)

Tinypony said:



			The Brooke have clearly stated that they won't be able to provide any more information until after the weekend.
Meanwhile, a thread continues that allows people to post opinions that could potentially damage the charity long-term.  What about innocent until proved guilty?  It's like mass hysteria here, is it something to do with the weather and people not getting out enough?
As said above, if someone posts photos now they could be very damaging and used elsewhere, and all while the charity is unable to respond.  Photos of injured horses give no context or timeframe anyway, so will prove nothing.
For those who want the horse autopsied - get real.  The charity will not have the funds to autopsy every animal that dies while in their care, and anyway, the carcass in question will be long gone.
One person saw one incident that they were unhappy about.  Instead of caring about the long-term future of the charity, they went on to a horse forum with a massive population in order to do... what?  Wind people up and reduce donations is the only conclusion I can come to.
The H+H jury is a worrying thing sometimes.
		
Click to expand...

I agree totally. Well said.


----------



## Amymay (28 April 2012)

I've seen no sign of mass hysteria on this thread. Only the faintly hysterical first post by op.

As for Muslims being against euthanasia. I've never read such rubbish in my life.

Time to lock this thread I think.

Op's claims are totally unfounded. The Brookes response is inconclusive to say the least, and it does no use to speculate further.

op I look fo5ward to your photographic proof.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 April 2012)

amymay said:



			I've seen no sign of mass hysteria on this thread. Only the faintly hysterical first post by op.

As for Muslims being against euthanasia. I've never read such rubbish in my life.

Time to lock this thread I think.

Op's claims are totally unfounded. The Brookes response is inconclusive to say the least, and it does no use to speculate further.

op I look fo5ward to your photographic proof.
		
Click to expand...

It's not rubbish amymay I have lived in an Islamic country and some Muslims don't believe in euthanasia.


----------



## touchstone (28 April 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			It's not rubbish amymay I have lived in an Islamic country and some Muslims don't believe in euthanasia.
		
Click to expand...

It seems to be the case that some are against euthanasia, a quick google brought up this:- Al-Salâm `Alaykum wa Rahmah Allah wa Barakâtuh.

This is a matter of "mercy killing" for animals is a matter of disagreement. We would say that it is permissible to kill animals that are dying to alleviate their pain. If it is a food animal like a sheep, then it should be properly slaughtered. A parakeet qualifies as a food animal. It is lawful to eat.

Some scholars view that it is unlawful to kill animals to alleviate their suffering.

For instance, al-Bahûtî writes in the Hanbalî legal work Kashâf al-Qinâ` (Volume 5 page 495):

It is not permissible to kill or slaughter the animal to alleviate its suffering, since it is still alive. Slaughtering it is an act of destruction and we are prohibited from destroying wealth. It is the same as the case for a person who suffers pain on account of a serious illness.

He means that it is not permissible to kill the animal that is not edible in order to relieve it from pain.

We regard the argument that killing the animal is destruction of wealth is a weak one, since an animal in such a situation does not retain any extra value alive, and especially if it is dying anyway, then there is no saving of value to be realized.

In the case of this budgerigar, however, it is unclear to us as to whether it qualifies as killing it to alleviate suffering. The fact that selling it is even being considered  and the idea of selling it is being dismissed only because the bird is unmarketable  makes it seem that the bird's interests are not the only concern. Is the bird truly suffering? Or is it simply not so pretty to look at? If the bird is truly suffering and in pain that will not go away, then we would say that putting it out of its misery by slaughtering it would be permitted.

And Allah knows best.

Fatwâ Department Research Committee of IslamToday chaired by Sheikh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî


----------



## Tinypony (28 April 2012)

amymay said:



			I've seen no sign of mass hysteria on this thread. Only the faintly hysterical first post by op.

As for Muslims being against euthanasia. I've never read such rubbish in my life.

Time to lock this thread I think.

Op's claims are totally unfounded. The Brookes response is inconclusive to say the least, and it does no use to speculate further.

op I look fo5ward to your photographic proof.
		
Click to expand...

That is not rubbish AM, google for yourself.  

Re photos, I really don't think you have a right to demand to see them, particularly as several other members have asked that they don't get put on the thread.  It seems a bit contrary to me to on the one hand suggest the thread is locked (brilliant idea) and on the other say that you are looking forward to photographic proof.

If Op had just wanted advice from people here, she could have done as many have done before.  "I have reason to believe that all is not as it seems in an animal charity.  I think I have photographic proof of neglect.  What should I do?".


----------



## ribbons (28 April 2012)

Amymay seems hell  bent on seeing those photos. I have to wonder why.


----------



## Achinghips (28 April 2012)

ribbons said:



			Amymay seems hell  bent on seeing those photos. I have to wonder why.
		
Click to expand...

Different methods of collecting evidence are not new, but they rarely include the use of photographs. Ethics of image-based research is a complex issue that necessitates careful consideration and practice.  A visual approach offers one more way to leverage optimal results. Narratives are, of course, powerful testimonials that project the voices of the informants but visual data have the potential to support and enhance narratives, as well as provide a tool for theory building.


----------



## Amymay (28 April 2012)

Because Ribbons, the op has made serious and disturbing allegations, which are apparently backed up by photographs.  By and large the brooke have denied them. So the photographs will show otherwise presumably.

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out the reason, now does it?


----------



## ribbons (28 April 2012)

I didn't say photos should not be seen. Of course they are valuable evidence. And it seems they have been sent to the place that needs to see them. How would it help or prove the situation for YOU to see them amymay, or me, or any member of a speculating group of forum members. Unless of course you are an expert in the field of photographic evidence. 
The photos have apparently been forwarded to the people who need to see them. That is not you and it's not any of us here. Just because you want to see them doesn't mean you need to. Hence my question.


----------



## Sandstone1 (28 April 2012)

Im no expert but maybe if the photos were shown on here it may damage any investigation by the brooke? Only a thought, and I may be wrong.
I too asked for the photos to be posted early on but thinking about it, it may not be a good thing at least untill investigations have been carried out by the correct people.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 April 2012)

The photos will show a horse who was involved in a RTA who later died there will be blood there will be flies there will be broken down stiches it will prove very little why anyone feels the the need to demand to see it is beyond me.


----------



## ann-jen (28 April 2012)

I haven't read through the thread from start to finish so apologies if this has already been covered.... but with regard to the dog with the broken legs. It isn't necessarily the case that the fractures weren't picked up by the Brooke. Sometimes fractures can be stabilised using external support.... a Robert Jones bandage (a thickly supportive bandage) or a splint rather than internal fixation with pins/plates etc. The trouble with using RJBs (in this country too) is that they require very careful monitering as the possibility of pressure sores and secondary infection is quite high. They require regular changing to assess the stability and healing of the fractures and to make sure no complications are arising due to this method of stabilisation. I have problems getting clients to comply with this in this country let alone in Egypt where with respect the lack of understanding and compliance is likely even lower. So I can imagine how the fractures became infected..... but this was probably not the way the dog was when it left the Brooke!
Also I visited the Brooke in Cairo some years ago and found it to be a well run and equipped equine hospital and was very impressed with the level of care and treatment of the patients when I was there.


----------



## lannerch (28 April 2012)

I find it hard to believe that anyone who bothered to study very hard at all those years at veterinary school would carry on in a way the op is suggesting and suspect that emotions and the shock at seeing a poor probably maltreated horse die in front of her is clouding her vision on what she saw.
When ever there is upset and death human nature is we look for blame it makes us feel better.
Now imagine if the brook hadn't been there that horse would have died by the side of the road, in a great more pain.
As many out there do . Any charity out there that try's to educate and improve the situation IMO deserves support.


----------



## BlackRider (28 April 2012)

I can't believe that people are asking for the photo's, which would be extremely distressing to see..


----------



## Wagtail (28 April 2012)

The photos would prove nothing to people on here. They would be pretty horrific whatever the truth is, because the horse has been in a RTA. They would not prove the case for or against the Brooke. FWIW I think that both accounts are correct. I believe the OP saw what she saw, and I believe the Brooke are telling the truth in their explanation of events. It is the INTERPRETATION of the OP that the Brooke were causing unnecessary suffering, because she saw a horse that was clearly suffering. Any horse hit by a car would be suffering whilst its injuries are severe, whether they end up recovering from the accident or dying from it. It would not be free from a degree of suffering.


----------



## charlimouse (28 April 2012)

Here are some of my parents pictures from their recent trip to Egypt (note date in photos!)

Yes, some of the Caleche horses are in a bad way, but it is a very different culture













This is a Brooke outpost in Egypt



















As the pictures show, the Brooke have provided the horses with shelter, food and water. Would horses in this condition be allowed to work in the UK - no. Should the horses in poor condition be allowed to work abroad - no. However if the caleche drivers were forced to stop working their horses, how would they survive? The best way to combat this is education. There is far more to any animal charity work than just treating the ill or injured, the major element is educating the owners and drivers to care for the horses. I don't doubt the OP, however I think there is far more to it than just seeing one injured horse on one day, and putting a western value on it.


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

charlimouse said:



			Here are some of my parents pictures from their recent trip to Egypt (note date in photos!)
		
Click to expand...

Thanks. Out of interest, where in Egypt were these pictures taken?


----------



## charlimouse (28 April 2012)

rhino said:



			Thanks. Out of interest, where in Egypt were these pictures taken?
		
Click to expand...

A place beginning with E, not too far from Luxor, but can't for the life of me remember what the name of the actual place was called !


----------



## Ladydragon (28 April 2012)

Honey08 said:



			I agree too TP, apart from I think that the OP was probably shocked and upset following what she saw, and came on to offload/ask what to do..
		
Click to expand...

Except for the accusation of substandard care, the statement that the organisation was 'corrupt to the core' and the forum should help 'expose' the charity...

That wasn't a "I'm concerned, what should I do" post...



charlimouse said:



			Would horses in this condition be allowed to work in the UK - no. Should the horses in poor condition be allowed to work abroad - no. However if the caleche drivers were forced to stop working their horses, how would they survive? The best way to combat this is education. There is far more to any animal charity work than just treating the ill or injured, the major element is educating the owners and drivers to care for the horses.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting these photos...  They offer a little perspective...


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

charlimouse said:



			A place beginning with E, not too far from Luxor, but can't for the life of me remember what the name of the actual place was called !
		
Click to expand...

Thank you. I was just wondering if it was Luxor, as according to OP The Brooke were claiming not to have any vehicles there  Don't know any basis to these claims though, and the sheer fact she went to visit a Brooke clinic _in_ Luxor (with lots of vehicles outside) seems counter intuitive to me.




Ladydragon said:



			Except for the accusation of substandard care, the statement that the organisation was 'corrupt to the core' and the forum should help 'expose' the charity...

That wasn't a "I'm concerned, what should I do" post...
		
Click to expand...

I quite agree. That was a prepared statement intended to undermine confidence in The Brooke. The fact it had been left for 2 weeks since the alleged incident would make it pretty sure that nothing could be done in investigating the condition of the horse itself  Very convenient.

To the people criticising the Brooke's response yesterday, what were you expecting?  What do you really think they could have come back and said yesterday? They said they were looking in to it, and would update when they could, I don't really see what more they could do at that point


----------



## Honey08 (28 April 2012)

Ladydragon said:



			Except for the accusation of substandard care, the statement that the organisation was 'corrupt to the core' and the forum should help 'expose' the charity...

That wasn't a "I'm concerned, what should I do" post...



/QUOTE]

I think it was - in a hysterical way.  You don't know how you'd react until  you've seen an animal or person suffer in a third world country... Was Bob Geldoff tactful,for example, when he shook the world to get help for Africa in the 80s... 

No I don't think putting this thread on was the best thing to do, but equally, Brooke's response didn't seem overly worried.  I'm not defending paticularly, just saying that I can understand her angle and don't think it was a "hate thread".  

In Africa and other third world countries I've been to I have spoken to a lot of local people that work with poor people, and they say that not a lot of money from big charities get through to the real deservers.  I've seen it a lot on the plane - lots of charity workers travelling out in first/business class... etc.  So I can see that angle too.  

Charliemouse those pics are great - its good to see their work in action, and those horses are a lot better condition than the ones I've seen in Cairo.  I'd love to see shelters like that for them.  Half the ones I've seen were lame as heck too. 

Click to expand...


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

Honey08 said:



			I think it was - in a hysterical way.
		
Click to expand...

Hysterical?  I didn't interpret it as being hysterical at all, it came across as a considered and well researched piece (if you were that concerned would you be looking up the balance sheet of the charity or who it's patrons were?) Emotive yes, but not hysterical.

It wasn't an 'oh help I've seen something awful, what can I do' post in any way IMO.


----------



## Honey08 (28 April 2012)

Well we will have to agree to differ.  It doesn't matter anyway.  This thread is going nowhere!


----------



## hairycob (28 April 2012)

Well said Rhino - I suspect some people would not be happy unless all the trustees fell on their swords at any slight lapse from the very high standards of vetinary care we can afford to give in the west. I suspect that many critics have never been to a developing country & just don't realise that probably the majority of working horses in countries like Egypt would have us straight on the phone to WHW if we saw them here. Far more horses can be helped by relatively simple things like educating about tack, farriery & improving basic care than will be helped by advanced diagnostics & vetinary care that cannot be followed through at home. By the way, if you think the horses in Luxor etc have it bad, don't even dare to think about what it's like away from the tourist areas & areas covered by the various charities because it can be far, far worse.


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

hairycob said:



			By the way, if you think the horses in Luxor etc have it bad, don't even dare to think about what it's like away from the tourist areas & areas covered by the various charities because it can be far, far worse.
		
Click to expand...

If anyone wants to see pictures of the reality of life(!) for horses, here's an article. There are plenty more. *Warning: photos you may find distressing*

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-death-tourism-troubled-region-dwindles.html

And I don't think it matters if this thread is going anywhere or not. I fear the damage has been done. Let's just hope horses don't suffer _because_ of it.


----------



## cambrica (28 April 2012)

Hopefully Rhino this thread will have to opposite reaction, with thanks to the photo's by Charlimouse it will certainly make me dig a bit deeper, so I don't think its a thread 'going nowhere'. It is highlighting the commitment of Brooke and the plight of these horses.


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

cambrica said:



			Hopefully Rhino this thread will have to opposite reaction, with thanks to the photo's by Charlimouse it will certainly make me dig a bit deeper, so I don't think its a thread 'going nowhere'. It is highlighting the commitment of Brooke and the plight of these horses.
		
Click to expand...

Cairo Farrier seems to be doing some amazing work - both educational and from a welfare standpoint - and HHOers are really involved with them. There _are_ people trying to do the right thing, so fingers crossed conditions will improve


----------



## metalmare (28 April 2012)

I have little to say, because I think it has all been said.

I would just like to make two points.

1.  Every charity will have good people and bad people working within it.  But the world is surely a better place for charities (of any sort).  They may not be perfect, but nor is the world, especially not the third world.  If we worried overly about what every donated penny was spent on none of us would ever donate to any charity ever again!  Well done to those people who give up their lives to work abroad in harsh conditions, making the world a better place.

2.  Having been in several third world countries in Africa and the middle east, I have seen horses in sad condition.  But I would like to defend the horse owners out there who do keep their horses in fantastic condition, despite the challenges they face.  I have seen some very healthy arabs in parts of Jordan and Egypt, rippling with muscle, not overweight like many British horses.  Their feet are neat and hard and their coats and gleaming with health.  So commiserations to the poorer people and poor horses in the third world and congratulations to those who keep their animals looking so well!


----------



## littlemisslauren (28 April 2012)

The response from the Brooke has worried me enough to cancel my SO, I hope to be proven wrong.


----------



## rhino (28 April 2012)

littlemisslauren said:



			The response from the Brooke has worried me enough to cancel my SO, I hope to be proven wrong.
		
Click to expand...

What more did you expect them to say? They were only contacted _yesterday_  and are dealing with a centre in Egypt.

Oh well, it looks like the HHO jury doesn't actually care to find out the truth anyway...


----------



## Wagtail (28 April 2012)

littlemisslauren said:



			The response from the Brooke has worried me enough to cancel my SO, I hope to be proven wrong.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## littlemisslauren (28 April 2012)

rhino said:



			What more did you expect them to say? They were only contacted _yesterday_  and are dealing with a centre in Egypt.

Oh well, it looks like the HHO jury doesn't actually care to find out the truth anyway...
		
Click to expand...

Sorry guys was going to add more but forgot to come back. I hadn't checked the dates of posts, so the timescale went un noticed to me.

Personally I felt the response was a brush off. With a phone call or email to the accused member of staff being enough to placify their concerns.

The accused vet is not going to admit to the situation the OP describes is he?

I do really hope that I regret what I have said, I have always supported Brooke and will of course do so again when I am satisfied a full investigation has been undertaken. I will also send out any money they may have missed from me If (hopefully when) this is the case.

We are all entitled to our own opinions / concerns / beliefs on here.


----------



## mightymammoth (28 April 2012)

littlemisslauren said:



			The response from the Brooke has worried me enough to cancel my SO, I hope to be proven wrong.
		
Click to expand...

That's a real shame, SPANA do some fantastic work out "there" as well maybe consider supporting them with a standing order instead, I do


----------



## stormalong (28 April 2012)

The pictures taken in Egypt on this forum are from Edfu.  My daughter is coming over again tonight, and I will gladly put on pictures taken on my recent holiday of The Brooke's outpost in Luxor, and  pictures of the horses out there.

I know from when I was young I always wanted to support an animal charity abroad - I think many of us do.  I always wanted to visit The Brooke, to see what they do, and I can post a couple of pictures of the one out in Luxor, but not of the horse.  

I have been to Egypt several times, and have donated to all 3 which are in Luxor.  I gave a donation to The Brooke whilst I was there a fortnight ago.  I stumbled upon the other charity when I asked a caleche driver to take me to The Brooke in 2006.   We dually arrived and upon walking round found a sign which said it was ACE.     

Gladly post pictures of Luxor, Egypt, to give you a feel for the place, but it will be tonight.

I do love the country is is so diverse, and it is affordable to visit.  We do often book the flights at the last minute to benefit from price cuts.  You can book on Easyjet, but with them you have to book well in advance to get the lowest prices.  The nearer to the time you want to travel, the more expensive the flight.

Hotels I book online through Travel Republic, or On the Beach.  Booking holidays through travel agents, just far too expensive.  Eating out in Luxor is very cheap, as long as you don't eat in the hotel restaurants.  Typical evening meal would be £5 each, but you can eat for far less.  The felafel sandwiches they sell at the side of the road are 20p, and delicious.
Never had an upset stomach yet.

So if you want to visit, it is do-able!  You also benefit from seeing whichever charity in life you want to support and seeing it first hand.


----------



## Freddie19 (29 April 2012)

littlemisslauren said:



			Sorry guys was going to add more but forgot to come back. I hadn't checked the dates of posts, so the timescale went un noticed to me.

Personally I felt the response was a brush off. With a phone call or email to the accused member of staff being enough to placify their concerns.

The accused vet is not going to admit to the situation the OP describes is he?

I do really hope that I regret what I have said, I have always supported Brooke and will of course do so again when I am satisfied a full investigation has been undertaken. I will also send out any money they may have missed from me If (hopefully when) this is the case.

We are all entitled to our own opinions / concerns / beliefs on here.
		
Click to expand...

I was the person who posted about emailing the Brooke in the first instance re the post on this forum.   So...they acknowledged my email with 45 minutes, they came back to me with the next email, stating that this post would be read and investigated, the first thing next morning. I have just got home now  to find their post on this forum.....what more do you expect them to do, fly out at great expense, to investigate now, I think not.....Brooke have worked for many many years in these countries, well before horse welfare became the done thing, they have saved and helped many poor horses from agonising deaths...and may I point out, that in the first instance these horses were in the majority british horses left out there after the war, some soldiers risked being discharged from the army for taking their horses out and shooting them, and then we have the horses who have been sold to these countries to show-jump or whatever and end up like this.  Brooke have and are still doing a brilliant job....one bad apple does not I repeat does not ruin their work. Please please step back and let them investigate this post.   If you want to get angry with welfare organisations, get angry with the government in this country, yes UK, who allow horses to be bred, to be born, to be starved to death, (and nobodys life depends on them as in Egypt).  Get angry with this government who have just taken on yet another take on the Dangerous dogs act.....Aim your bile at them.  Lets sort out our faults. You have a voice, you have a vote, use it...post on political forums, write or email your local mp, thats were it should be heading.


----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)




----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)




----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)

Herewith photographs of The Brooke in Luxor, and a photo of one of the caleche horses for your perusal.


----------



## rhino (29 April 2012)

Trying to upload photos? Where have you got them stored?


----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)

Sorry, last photo of caleche horse did not load.


----------



## rhino (29 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			Sorry, last photo of caleche horse did not load.
		
Click to expand...

Is your HHO album set to public? If it's private they won't post


----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)

Heck, I don't know how daughter posted them.  Even she found it a bit difficult.  Said ok if you had done it before, but it took her a little time.  You can see the first two though?  She has gone to bed now!  I would have loved to have posted more, and we did try to load others, but it was just taking so long.


----------



## rhino (29 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			Heck, I don't know how daughter posted them.  Even she found it a bit difficult.  Said ok if you had done it before, but it took her a little time.  You can see the first two though?  She has gone to bed now!  I would have loved to have posted more, and we did try to load others, but it was just taking so long.
		
Click to expand...

Can't see any of them, sorry 

If you click on 'User CP' at the top of the page, then on 'Pictures and Albums' on the side bar, then on your album title to open the album. Once you are in,  click on 'Edit Album' at the top and click on the option for public.

Once you have done that, click on the photo you want to put on the thread, then copy the BB code under it (the one which starts and ends [ IMG ]) and then paste it on a post on here. You can have lots of pictures on the same post too, don't need a new one for each pic


----------



## stormalong (29 April 2012)

Thanks for your help Rhino, yes she had set it to private!  I can see them when I look at forum, thought everyone else could too!  I have set it to public now.  Hope it works.  
Got to go to bed, show in the morning!


----------



## rhino (29 April 2012)

stormalong said:



			Thanks for your help Rhino, yes she had set it to private!  I can see them when I look at forum, thought everyone else could too!  I have set it to public now.  Hope it works.  
Got to go to bed, show in the morning!
		
Click to expand...

Yay! I can see them, thanks. Good luck tomorrow


----------



## TheBrooke (1 May 2012)

Message from the Chief Executive, Petra Ingram

I would like to begin by thanking those contributors who have shown support to the Brooke over the past weekend. It is a difficult time for any charity when someone makes a complaint on a public forum without seeking an explanation from the charity first. 

Just to recap, last week a complaint was made on this forum, which was subsequently notified to us. It is very sad that this involved a working horse in Luxor which had been involved in a road traffic accident and died while at the Brooke's clinic. Unfortunately this type of accident is not uncommon in a busy city where horses work alongside cars and buses. In Cairo and Delhi they are banned from the town centre, but not in Luxor. 

When this mare was admitted to the Luxor clinic, there were no clinical signs to justify euthanasia  she had walked in on foot and showed no sign of fractures. An examination carried out by the vet showed lacerated wounds on her right front leg and right hind limb as a result of the accident. The vet in charge is extremely experienced and provided pain relief and stitched the wounds. Unfortunately the mare died shortly afterwards, we believe from internal injuries.

The Brooke has a clearly defined animal welfare policy and it is a condition of funding that all our overseas projects comply with these standards. We employ highly trained veterinary staff and regularly review and update clinical practice, implementing lessons learned in daily working. We do not have luxurious clinics or offices, equally we don't invest in X-ray machines as these are expensive and we believe the money can be better used helping more animals. We do whatever is necessary to reach 250,000 equine animals across the country out of an estimated total population of around 1.2 million, and these are some of the difficult decisions that have to be made.

In accordance with our euthanasia policy, we will not put a horse to sleep without the owners permission. As this forum has already highlighted, this is sometimes difficult to get, due to religious beliefs or when there is a hope the animal might recover, an animal vital to providing income to a poor family. Our priority is to relieve pain and to provide the most appropriate treatment according to the situation. We believe the vet concerned followed the most appropriate course of action.

The Brooke takes its responsibilities as the custodian of supporters money for the benefit of working equine animals overseas very seriously and we always investigate complaints. In this case, we only wish there had been more discussion with the vet at the time to ensure a better understanding of our approach. If you would like me to answer any individual questions, please email me, Petra Ingram, at info@thebrooke.org.

Last year, globally our work reached 1.1 million working horses, donkeys and mules in ten countries across Asia, Africa and Latin America. Our goal is to increase the number of working animals we help to 2 million a year by 2016. If we are to continue this vital role, which improves the lives of equine animals and also helps the people who depend on them, we need your continued support.


----------



## mle22 (1 May 2012)

You have my continued support - it was never in doubt.


----------



## Amymay (1 May 2012)

Thanks once again for your response The Brooke.

I think what concerned me most about the initial report by the OP and The Brookes subsequent response was that there was no mention about the actions of the vet allowing the mare to lie on a dirt floor with ruptured sutures, bleeding, and flies.  Obviously I don't know whether this was the actual condition of the mare (as no photos have been provided) - but I'm assuming you've seen them and can either confirm or deny her condition.  

Working in these conditions must be challenging - I agree, and I absolutely support your work.

I also agree that the complaint should have been made to you first - not on a public forum.


----------



## touchstone (1 May 2012)

Thankyou for that explanation, I hope The Brooke can continue to help many more animals in dire circumstances and I will continue to support them as I can.


----------



## Merlin11 (1 May 2012)

I will certainly continue to support the Brooke. One unfortunate incident shouldn't invalidate all the valuable work that you undoubtedly do across the world. It must be so difficult to work in these conditions and circumstances.


----------



## Mithras (1 May 2012)

There is no protocol set down in legislation governing complaints procedures by members of the public against charities.  There is certainly no legal requirement for a charity to be consulted before a complaint is made against it.  There is advisory guidance by the Charities Commission which implies that it may be helpful in a complaint against a charity which it may investigate, but it seems quite likely that this matter will not fall within those grounds.  

Furthermore, I don't think that the OP was specifically making a complaint against the charity involved, but raising awareness of an incident which she personally witnessed which concerned her, in the best way that she could think of.  
In other words, her concerns were about the way that the circumstances in which the horse died, which just happened to be under the ambit of the Brooke.

Charities are in the public eye by their very nature, and will be open to recieving useful information from a variety of sources.  I personally cannot see any problem in recieving such information on a public forum.  I don't think the issue here is the way in which the complaint was made, but the subjective content of the matter.

I think there is an awareness that things are done with animals in countries such as Egypt in a way that would not be acceptable in the UK.  No doubt the Brooke's vets are more accustomed than the OP to working in this environment.  The question is where the line is drawn between working with the locals and supporting what amounts to unacceptable treatment?  Excuse me if I am misinterpreting this, but this would seem to be where the OP's concern, and that of some others, lies.


----------



## rhino (1 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Furthermore, I don't think that the OP was specifically making a complaint against the charity involved.
		
Click to expand...

Was the title of the thread not a giveaway?  Or the continual mention of how much money they received compared to the other charity competitor the OP champions  and other uncorroborated attempts to discredit the charity?

Obviously I interpreted it rather differently from you.


----------



## Mithras (1 May 2012)

rhino said:



			Was the title of the thread not a giveaway  Or the continual mention of how much money they received compared to the other charity competitor the OP champions 

Click to expand...

Is there an objection to more than one charity being involved in a particular area?

I see absolutely no reason whatsoever why the OP should not post her concerns on a public forum.


----------



## Amymay (1 May 2012)

I absolutely saw the OP as a complaint.


----------



## Ladydragon (1 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Furthermore, I don't think that the OP was specifically making a complaint against the charity involved, but raising awareness of an incident which she personally witnessed which concerned her, in the best way that she could think of.  
In other words, her concerns were about the way that the circumstances in which the horse died, which just happened to be under the ambit of the Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

_"The Brooke Hospital for horses according to its year end balance sheet had a record year in 2010/11. Fundraising income grew to 14.8m. They had record breaking legacies of £5,871.000. Their President is The Duchess of Cornwall, and two of their Patrons include Sir Peter O'Sullivan and Captain Richard Waygood."

"The Brooke is a very well known charity in the equestrian world, however if you knew what was going on at the charity, and the poor level of care, I am sure you would give your hard earned money elsewhere."

"This Charity is corrupt to the core,... _"

We obviously interpret things differently if you think the OP was highlighting a welfare concern about *an* incident that 'just happened to be' The Brook...


----------



## rhino (1 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Is there an objection to more than one charity being involved in a particular area?

I see absolutely no reason whatsoever why the OP should not post her concerns on a public forum.
		
Click to expand...

No, I already support another charity working in the same area already 

You don't? Despite the fact that several people have said they will stop donating on the back of the OP, and at least one is not going to donate to _any horse charity at all_? I don't think it acceptable in any way to denigrate the name of a charity without having the common decency to contact them first.

And despite the fact that 'naming and shaming' is not allowed on here under the t&c's?


----------



## touchstone (1 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Is there an objection to more than one charity being involved in a particular area?

I see absolutely no reason whatsoever why the OP should not post her concerns on a public forum.
		
Click to expand...

Posting concerns on a public forum would have been better done after contacting The Brooke and at least allowing them to respond, not before from politeness if nothing else.  We aren't allowed to discuss a few things on here such as dealers, certain rescues etc. because of the damage it could cause and the actions that could be taken by the dealers etc. It's no different to the damage that could be inflicted on a charity that relies on public support due to somebody bad mouthing them.


----------



## Freddie19 (1 May 2012)

rhino said:



			No, I already support another charity working in the same area already 

You don't? Despite the fact that several people have said they will stop donating on the back of the OP, and at least one is not going to donate to _any horse charity at all_? I don't think it acceptable in any way to denigrate the name of a charity without having the common decency to contact them first.

And despite the fact that 'naming and shaming' is not allowed on here under the t&c's?
		
Click to expand...

I agree with you. The original poster did indeed name and shame the Brooke...they posted on a forum, which, I would imagine is probably one the most read forums, without, as I understand it, contacting the Brooke first. This is the reason I emailed the Brooke immediately. If as you say naming and shaming is not allowed under the t&c's, why was this thread allowed to continue and build into a (as is happening more and more on here) nasty conversation.


----------



## Ladydragon (1 May 2012)

rhino said:



			And despite the fact that 'naming and shaming' is not allowed on here under the t&c's?
		
Click to expand...

I'm still surprised it has been left...  Or that the OP wasn't severely clipped to limit to the actual case/complaint/concern in question rather than a generalised slur on the charity as a whole...


----------



## Amymay (1 May 2012)

It may well be that The Brooke are happy for the post to stay for the moment - hence its lack of removal.


----------



## cornbrodolly (1 May 2012)

I am another who will continue to support the Brooke. One incident must not undermine their good work in difficult circumstances across the world.
I have been to Egypt and Jordan , and surely we should be helping all we can to help hotrses in these regions and throughout the world, and not slagging off the brooke after 1 incident?


----------



## Mypinkpony (1 May 2012)

I too support Brooke and will continue to do so despite this post. As many of said one or two sad stories does not take away the thousands of lives they save. I think think everyone should look at the good they do and have done.

Although i do support the OP in bringing this particular story to light and hopefully having a full investigation into it. Whilst the brooke may be a great charity it does not mean the occasional 'bad apple' (possibly the vet in this case) can not end up working within the organisation and not providing the high care that the brooke expect. I think it is very important that this issue is further investigated and as others say a phone call to this particular man is not enough, if he is dropping standards of care he will not be admitting it over a phone call. Hopefully the OP photos will prove vital in this case.


----------



## Achinghips (1 May 2012)

amymay said:



			Thanks once again for your response The Brooke.

....what concerned me most about the initial report by the OP and The Brookes subsequent response was that there was no mention about the actions of the vet allowing the mare to lie on a dirt floor with ruptured sutures, bleeding, and flies.  Obviously I don't know whether this was the actual condition of the mare (as no photos have been provided) - but I'm assuming you've seen them and can either confirm or deny her condition.
		
Click to expand...

SO what about this, Brooke? Your response does not fulfil the requirements of addressing this detail of the issue raised? Is this how your experienced veterinary staff treated this particular horse?


----------



## Keen (1 May 2012)

rhino said:



			No, I already support another charity working in the same area already 

You don't? Despite the fact that several people have said they will stop donating on the back of the OP, and at least one is not going to donate to _any horse charity at all_? I don't think it acceptable in any way to denigrate the name of a charity without having the common decency to contact them first.

And despite the fact that 'naming and shaming' is not allowed on here under the t&c's?
		
Click to expand...

What she said.



And my own own opinion, for what it is worth:

I know this forum is as mad as a box of frogs, but this thread is the maddest I have seen here.  There is no question of me stopping my donation to The Brooke.  Spare a moments thought for the _people_ they help: 

http://www.thebrooke.org/our-work/stories/livelihoods

If you are looking for an excuse to not put your hand in your pocket, fine, but for me I am fully aware that by having the kind of income that allows me to ride - or for that matter have a computer and post about it - means I've already won life's lottery. I want agencies to be willing to put themselves in the firing line, reach out, and make changes.  Finally, I can't actually see why the centre's strategy (give the animal a short amount of time and see) was an unreasonable one. It is very sad to see this thread on the front page of HHO.


Just seen this:


Merry Crisis said:



			I think the OP is quite right to question the Brooke TBH. Money is sent to them and who really knows where its going. We sit here in our comfortable world, a world away from this charity. We just expect money to go into the aid of animals but...........does it?
		
Click to expand...


Grrr.... FFS


----------



## touchstone (1 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			SO what about this, Brooke? Your response does not fulfil the requirements of addressing this detail of the issue raised? Is this how your experienced veterinary staff treated this particular horse?
		
Click to expand...

I think to be honest that they have addressed this in the treatment the horse received; being given pain relief and a quiet place is still better than being left on the street.   There is still no evidence to prove otherwise, I think that perhaps the OP has been shocked at seeing a case that The Brooke must deal with on a daily basis, they aren't in the uk with the best facilities etc and have to cope with what they've got.   

That horse is dead and gone now and I think we should be focusing on helping those that need it.


----------



## rhino (1 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			SO what about this, Brooke? Your response does not fulfil the requirements of addressing this detail of the issue raised? Is this how your experienced veterinary staff treated this particular horse?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, what about it? Have you actually bothered to contact them and ask the question for yourself _as the Brooke have repeatedly asked anyone with any concerns to do?_

Or does your level of concern merely consist of posting on a forum?


----------



## ester (1 May 2012)

I think Rhino was asking a valid question actually..


----------



## CatStew (1 May 2012)

Lady La La said:



			I find Rhino to be one of the most level headed, sensible and polite members of this forum tbh. I have no idea what was posted to make you feel this way, but certainly nothing that I can see from Rhino on this thread has been bullying 

Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%, I don't post on here very often, but I do follow it and read it a lot and I always find Rhino's advice/comments very interesting and sensible.


----------



## FionaM12 (1 May 2012)

Lady La La said:



			I find Rhino to be one of the most level headed, sensible and polite members of this forum tbh. I have no idea what was posted to make you feel this way, but certainly nothing that I can see from Rhino on this thread has been bullying 

Click to expand...

I agree with this. When I came here last summer, a new horse owner deperately needing advice, Rhino was one of the kindest and most helpful people. She even sent me (an anonymous stranger) a pm offering to lend a me book. An act of generousity I won't forget. 

And yes Rhino, I still have the book and will be returning it soon.  It's been very helpful.


----------



## JFTDWS (1 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			I agree with this. When I came here last summer, a new horse owner deperately needing advice, Rhino was one of the kindest and most helpful people. She even sent me (an anonymous stranger) a pm offering to lend a me book. An act of generousity I won't forget. 

And yes Rhino, I still have the book and will be returning it soon.  It's been very helpful.
		
Click to expand...

You're not the only one - I have one of rhino's books about 2 feet away (haven't got very far with it yet though  useless!).  AND she sent me haribo for my birthday with the book


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

Come on people. Leave AHs alone. Whilst I agree that Rhino is not a bully and that her manner is simply very assertive and occasionally abrupt, if AHs finds her unpleasant, then obviously that is genuinely how she views her. We are all free to interpret others mannerisms in the way that we find them.


----------



## rhino (1 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			And yes Rhino, I still have the book and will be returning it soon.  It's been very helpful.
		
Click to expand...

Don't bother my dear, I found another copy in the same charity shop a week or two ago 

And please could we keep this thread on topic if possible, I still feel it is an important issue to be discussed. FWIW I haven't dealt with the Brooke before but have been in contact with them since the OP was first posted. I am not willing to cross post emails etc withough express permission but personally think they are dealing with it as well as they can


----------



## Always Henesy (1 May 2012)

Merry Crisis said:



			Well crikey, I think the above speaks volumes about your own social skills and your argument has disolved along with this deeply unpleasant post. I have seen no post from Rhino that was in any way bullying, she has voiced her opinion in a fair and literate manner. Big mistake Achinghips. Sorry.
		
Click to expand...

Erm yep ditto this....


----------



## Goldenstar (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			Come on people. Leave AHs alone. Whilst I agree that Rhino is not a bully and that her manner is simply very assertive and occasionally abrupt, if AHs finds her unpleasant, then obviously that is genuinely how she views her. We are all free to interpret others mannerisms in the way that we find them.
		
Click to expand...

So can't we comment on what we consider bad behaviour IMO AH's took the debate away from the issue and into the personal not on and while I don't think for a nano second it would be possible to bully Rhino that's how bulling starts.


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			So can't we comment on what we consider bad behaviour IMO AH's took the debate away from the issue and into the personal not on and while I don't think for a nano second it would be possible to bully Rhino that's how bulling starts.
		
Click to expand...

I am sure Rhino is perfectly able to defend herself. How many people need to jump on someone for something they perceive as wrong? That is where this place gets a pack mentality. FTR I actually am on Rhino's side in this argument re the Brooke.


----------



## Goldenstar (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			I am sure Rhino is perfectly able to defend herself. How many people need to jump on someone for something they perceive as wrong? That is where this place gets a pack mentality. FTR I actually am on Rhino's side in this argument re the Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

Wagtail I stared to type as soon as I read it no one had replyed a pack is not the same thing as several people reading a comment and thinking that's not on, I am sure Rhino can defend herself I I did Not perceive it was wrong I THINK it was wrong I have a right to comment and would do so again.


----------



## FionaM12 (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			I am sure Rhino is perfectly able to defend herself. How many people need to jump on someone for something they perceive as wrong?
		
Click to expand...

When I hear or see someone I know being insulted, it is usually my reaction to defend them. Whether it's a friend or a colleague I have always done this. I don't pass by on the other side, even though they may be able to defend themselves. I consider this correct behaviour and at my age am not likely to change my mind.


----------



## Ladydragon (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			I am sure Rhino is perfectly able to defend herself. How many people need to jump on someone for something they perceive as wrong? That is where this place gets a pack mentality. FTR I actually am on Rhino's side in this argument re the Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

Fair point...  It's just the wanton use of "You're a bully" when it so obviously isn't just drives me a bit batty... 

My tolerance levels for true bullying are slim and none...


----------



## JFTDWS (1 May 2012)

I was always under the impression that you should stand up for other people if you believe them to be in the right, regardless of whether they need you to or not   I guess it's a morality thing, and since I've never been one for following other people's rules, I won't hand my responsibility to make moral choices for myself over at this juncture, thanks Wagtail


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			When I hear or see someone I know being insulted, it is usually my reaction to defend them. Whether it's a friend or a colleague I have always done this. I don't pass by on the other side, even though they may be able to defend themselves. I consider this correct behaviour and at my age am not likely to change my mind.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, as I would do if around ten other people had not already done so. Obviously, you could all have just been responding to the post before reading the other responses. But seeing so many one after the other looked rather OTT. I would have been embarassed, personally.


----------



## FionaM12 (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			Yes, of course, as I would do if around ten other people had not already done so. Obviously, you could all have just been responding to the post before reading the other responses. But seeing so many one after the other looked rather OTT. I would have been embarassed, personally. 

Click to expand...

I think my post was actually the first.


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

Ladydragon said:



			Fair point...  It's just the wanton use of "You're a bully" when it so obviously isn't just drives me a bit batty... 

My tolerance levels for true bullying are slim and none...
		
Click to expand...

I hate bullying with a passion too.


----------



## rhino (1 May 2012)

Wagtail said:



			I hate bullying with a passion too.
		
Click to expand...

I would hope every one of us would. I'm happy to stand or fall by the words I write, and if people are so offended by that they put me on UI it's fine


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			I think my post was actually the first. 

Click to expand...


Fine, and I'm sorry to all those who posted without seeing all the other responses. I just don't like seeing anyone being jumped on by so many others even if they have made a misjudgement. If however, they are being blatently cruel to their horse, or to another person (and I don't mean one angry, misjudged remark), then all pile in


----------



## Wagtail (1 May 2012)

rhino said:



			I would hope every one of us would. I'm happy to stand or fall by the words I write, and if people are so offended by that they put me on UI it's fine 

Click to expand...

Exactly.


----------



## Holly Hocks (1 May 2012)

I am glad The Brooke have responded.  I will continue with my monthly payment to them


----------



## stormalong (2 May 2012)

What really concerns me about The Brooke's latest response about the injuries to the horse, is that they mention the horses injuries - on the right side - as they call it, (which are evident in the photograph that I sent to them) however make no mention of the injuries on the other side.  So I feel they are just commenting on what they can see, and not the full story.  After all, I was there on the day.  On my first visit I saw the horse lying on its near side, and when I returned it was propped up on its off side.  There was a huge open wound on its hind leg - you could easily fit a football in it.  The vet said it was a drain.

Within 2 hours of me seeing the horse, and I did arrive shortly after the accident, the horse was dead.  The 'highly experienced vet' as The Brooke quotes him - assured me the horse had superficial wounds and would make a full recovery.

The question of putting to sleep has been raised on the forum.  However, The Brooke do not say that the owner in question refused this.  I was with the horse 15 minutes before it died.  The vet was sat with other Egyptians chatting - when I raised concerns about the horse - he dismissed them entirely and said it would be fine.  He didn't get up to check the horse, even though I was very concerned about its condition.  By this time the sedation had worn off.

Why can they not afford an x-ray machine?  In an earlier post they say it could not be justified?  There are 350 caleche horses along the Corniche in Luxor, this does not include all the other horses and donkeys working in Luxor, which must be in the region of an extra 200 animals.

Why did the Brooke send the dog home with a bandage round it when it had 2 broken legs?
When it went to ACE it was put to sleep.  Why leave a dog in agony?  The owner of the dog wasn't against euthanasia.

I felt I had to raise your concerns.  Everyone can make their own decision on which charity they support.  However look at other charities in the area, and look at their facilities, and what they can provide - then make your mind up on who delivers the best care.  Someone earlier posted that ACE must generate more western money than The Brooke - they do not even come close.

I know what I saw that day - I saw it first hand, and so did the vet in question.  Remember vets in Egypt do not get paid large amounts, and many of them do not train on horses.  Vets out there are trained on animals in the food chain, this does not include horses.  Their wages are approx. £2,500 a year - so not a big drain on the 14.8m The Brooke generate.

A good reply from no doubt a highly paid person in an office in London trained to dealing with publicity for the charity.  No doubt more mailings will appear through my door this week from The Brooke, and I will find their advertisements in the national newspapers.
Money going to the sharp end - I don't think so.


----------



## Casey76 (2 May 2012)

While I don't dispute what you saw (as I wasn't there), if there were undiagnosed internal injuries (and things like a liver haemorrhage can be extremely difficult to diagnose), there are a multitude of possible causes of death which could also not be foreseen (infarct, embolism, aneurysm, haemorrhage etc).

Why was the vet dismissive of you?  Well he may have been on a 10 min coffee break after working tirelessly for hours before you arrived.  Unless you camped out there all day, you have no idea what his work schedule was like.  the horse may have been checked just prior to your arrival.

I also think you have to take into consideration differences in culture and attitude to animals in general.  Even to a vet, that horse may have been "just another horse" who had been injured, patched up with what was available and periodically checked upon.  Maybe there isn't the staff to do 15 min checks on all of the patients... who knows?  To him you might have been "another bl**dy Westerner sticking her nose in."


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

Storm - have you taken your concerns to the Brooke straight? If you are not happy with the answers you are being given then ask what their charity's complaint procedure is - they must have one. There are channels to follow and you say you have proof of them lying. 

I just don't think a public forum is the place for this, sorry. If it is taken further and is in the public domain anyway, then that's different IMO.

Well done for sticking to your guns though


----------



## misterjinglejay (2 May 2012)

I've read this thread with interest, as I do the PFK, Cairo Farrier, ESAF, etc threads on FB. 
There's no doubting that it's a nightmare situation out there (as it is for animals in many parts of the world, including the good ol' UK). And these charities, and their staff, are really fighting against the tide of poverty, ignorance, religeous beliefs and so on.

I won't stop donating to them, and I would urge others to continue to support them. The animals need our help.
We don't know the truth of this incident (not that I'm doubting the OP at all), and maybe never will. But if we all stopped aiding them, the horror they suffer daily, would surely get much worse.
I for one, need to know that I'm doing what I can, however small.


----------



## Destiny95 (2 May 2012)

TheBrooke said:



			Message from the Chief Executive, Petra Ingram

I would like to begin by thanking those contributors who have shown support to the Brooke over the past weekend. It is a difficult time for any charity when someone makes a complaint on a public forum without seeking an explanation from the charity first. 

Just to recap, last week a complaint was made on this forum, which was subsequently notified to us. It is very sad that this involved a working horse in Luxor which had been involved in a road traffic accident and died while at the Brooke's clinic. Unfortunately this type of accident is not uncommon in a busy city where horses work alongside cars and buses. In Cairo and Delhi they are banned from the town centre, but not in Luxor. 

When this mare was admitted to the Luxor clinic, there were no clinical signs to justify euthanasia  she had walked in on foot and showed no sign of fractures. An examination carried out by the vet showed lacerated wounds on her right front leg and right hind limb as a result of the accident. The vet in charge is extremely experienced and provided pain relief and stitched the wounds. Unfortunately the mare died shortly afterwards, we believe from internal injuries.

The Brooke has a clearly defined animal welfare policy and it is a condition of funding that all our overseas projects comply with these standards. We employ highly trained veterinary staff and regularly review and update clinical practice, implementing lessons learned in daily working. We do not have luxurious clinics or offices, equally we don't invest in X-ray machines as these are expensive and we believe the money can be better used helping more animals. We do whatever is necessary to reach 250,000 equine animals across the country out of an estimated total population of around 1.2 million, and these are some of the difficult decisions that have to be made.

In accordance with our euthanasia policy, we will not put a horse to sleep without the owners permission. As this forum has already highlighted, this is sometimes difficult to get, due to religious beliefs or when there is a hope the animal might recover, an animal vital to providing income to a poor family. Our priority is to relieve pain and to provide the most appropriate treatment according to the situation. We believe the vet concerned followed the most appropriate course of action.

The Brooke takes its responsibilities as the custodian of supporters money for the benefit of working equine animals overseas very seriously and we always investigate complaints. In this case, we only wish there had been more discussion with the vet at the time to ensure a better understanding of our approach. If you would like me to answer any individual questions, please email me, Petra Ingram, at info@thebrooke.org.

Last year, globally our work reached 1.1 million working horses, donkeys and mules in ten countries across Asia, Africa and Latin America. Our goal is to increase the number of working animals we help to 2 million a year by 2016. If we are to continue this vital role, which improves the lives of equine animals and also helps the people who depend on them, we need your continued support.
		
Click to expand...

It is a shame the response is so marketing and PR led. I would have hoped they would have at least said they would work with the Luxor outpost to ensure they have the right staff and facilities to help animals that their limited resources will allow. 

It would not be unreasonable for them to just consider that a member of staff they have at one outpost doesn't represent the same high standard of care and positive attitude the Brooke prides itself on. It is not unlikely that a large organisation like this has a few bad apples.

They obviously do good work, but this response is designed to make us shut up and stop talking about it and frankly makes me think less of them.


----------



## Mithras (2 May 2012)

rhino said:



			I just don't think a public forum is the place for this, sorry. If it is taken further and is in the public domain anyway, then that's different IMO.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I really do disagree.  There is absolutely no agreement/protocol/legislative requirement for people who have issues with charities to keep them secret or discuss them with the charity first.  If it were considered that important, it would be legislated for.

I cannot see how this issue is not suitable for the public domain.  In fact, I would say that the charities sector hugely benefits from the discussion of concerns on public forums, as it serves as a check and balance function which is not provided by the Charities Commission, which has limited powers and cannot intervene in areas concerning the services that a charity provides (as opposed, for example, to financial irregularities).

Charities are by their very nature, public bodies.  They recieve huge tax benefits and public funding to fuel their very existence, and benefit from seperate legal persona.  Public reporting of concerns has served regulation of the charities sector well in the past, as sometimes it is the only way that concerns have become known.  The average member of the public cannot be expected to be as well versed in dealing with the charities sector as those who work in fundraising or pr for instance, and suggesting that they should be curtailed in making their concerns about a charity publicly known goes against the whole ethos of charities working for the benefit of others (as opposed to themselves).

Furthermore, charities in many ways are subject to fiduciary duties which raises the standard of their behaviour in certain aspects, and which makes them open to being judged by members of the public.  I really do not think the charities sector should be shrouded in secrecy, and members of the public deterred by coming forwards with concerns.

I see no reason why a culture of secrecy should be encouraged.  Furthermore, in this instance, the issue was abroad and the charity seemed unaware of it and in need of checking its facts, which suggests a remoteness from its activites on the ground.  Why should the charity have to be told what is happening by third parties anyway? 

Can I say again, that I see no reason why a culture of secrecy should be encouraged, and that it honestly makes me suspicious when it is suggested that one should be.

I think there is a divergence of interest here.  To me, the OP seems more concerned about horses and their welfare, on the other hand, some posters seem more concerned with the public image of the charity involved.


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

Destiny95 said:



			It is a shame the response is so marketing and PR led. I would have hoped they would have at least said they would work with the Luxor outpost to ensure they have the right staff and facilities to help animals that their limited resources will allow. 

It would not be unreasonable for them to just consider that a member of staff they have at one outpost doesn't represent the same high standard of care and positive attitude the Brooke prides itself on. It is not unlikely that a large organisation like this has a few bad apples.

They obviously do good work, but this response is designed to make us shut up and stop talking about it and frankly makes me think less of them.
		
Click to expand...

If you have concerns contact them... of course they are going to put a carefully worded statement on a public forum. They are perfectly willing to answer questions as they have repeatedly stated. As it stands you have absolutely no idea of what work they have done since the complaint was reported, and is still ongoing.


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I see no reason why a culture of secrecy should be encouraged.  Furthermore, in this instance, the issue was abroad and the charity seemed unaware of it and in need of checking its facts, which suggests a remoteness from its activites on the ground.  Why should the charity have to be told what is happening by third parties anyway? 

Can I say again, that I see no reason why a culture of secrecy should be encouraged, and that it honestly makes me suspicious when it is suggested that one should be.
		
Click to expand...

No-one has _ever_ said that it should be kept secret or that OP should't follow it up.

The Brooke (according to the font of all knowledge that is wikipedia ) has over 800 staff 'in the field'. How on earth do you expect the named contact in the UK to be aware of all the staff and every animal they treat?  If they had not 'checked their facts' by contacting their people in Egypt but stated they knew exactly what was going on, there would have (rightly) been outcry on here.

I think the Brooke was on a hiding to nothing in this thread. Whatever they replied, however they dealt with it certain people were not willing or able to change their views. At the end of the day I do find that sad. It is all down to the opinion of _one_ person. I am also going to ask for clarity into IPC's 'naming and shaming' policy. 

OP - the Brooke does indeed have a formulated complaints procedure, which can be found here. Please keep us updated as to how you get on


----------



## Destiny95 (2 May 2012)

rhino said:



			If you have concerns contact them... of course they are going to put a carefully worded statement on a public forum. They are perfectly willing to answer questions as they have repeatedly stated. As it stands you have absolutely no idea of what work they have done since the complaint was reported, and is still ongoing.
		
Click to expand...

A carefully worded statement could still have included 'thanks for bringing your concern to our attention and we will look into it'. 

I can't see anything in the statement that suggests they will look into it - internally or externally - which is a shame as it would have helped them to show they were acting on feedback.

We all want to see The Brooke to use their money as efficiently as possible to help animals in need - thats why we donate to them. Surely that is why the responses to this post are so passionate - because we don't want it to be true! I'd suggest feedback - good and especially bad - should be taken notice of by The Brooke. As you quite rightly say Rhino, they can't possibly be aware of everything going on across the charity...


----------



## Mithras (2 May 2012)

rhino said:



			The Brooke (according to the font of all knowledge that is wikipedia ) has over 800 staff 'in the field'. How on earth do you expect the named contact in the UK to be aware of all the staff and every animal they treat?  If they had not 'checked their facts' by contacting their people in Egypt but stated they knew exactly what was going on, there would have (rightly) been outcry on here.
		
Click to expand...

In the timescale that had passed, I would expect them to have found out the details of this incident, yes.  If the named contact in the UK is not aware of all their staff and every animal they treat, or there is not at least a simple logging in procedure which makes the facilitation of this information easily accessible, what is the point in them raising money in the UK?

Accountability is hardly an unreasonable requirment of a charity.



rhino said:



			I think the Brooke was on a hiding to nothing in this thread. Whatever they replied, however they dealt with it certain people were not willing or able to change their views. At the end of the day I do find that sad. It is all down to the opinion of _one_ person. I am also going to ask for clarity into IPC's 'naming and shaming' policy.
		
Click to expand...

Its not simply the concern of one person...
I still see the concern as not being primarily about the Brooke, but about the welfare of equines.  Therefore, I would have been more reassured by a response from the Brooke addressing this and thanking the OP for making them aware of this issue, followed up by a more detailed response.  Of course this may yet happen in time.  



rhino said:



			OP - the Brooke does indeed have a formulated complaints procedure, which can be found here. Please keep us updated as to how you get on 

Click to expand...

Again, there is no requirement on the OP to contact the charity with her concern direct.  In fact, it does seem that when she did contact them with her concern, their response was initially to deny their involvment.  Furthermore, there is a clear conflict of interest in making such a complaint direct to the charity itself, and since they are funded by public donation, it seems not inappropriate to raise the issue in public.



rhino said:



			I am also going to ask for clarity into IPC's 'naming and shaming' policy.
		
Click to expand...

This almost sounds like a threat.  Its actually a little unclear what you mean here, but I am guessing you will contact the forum administrators with a view to having the thread pulled in case there is any risk of libel action against IPC, the parent company of H&H.  

I should therefore point out at this juncture that there is a great deal of difference between a successful defamation action, funded by a Plaintiff in the courts, and a company taking protective action on the basis of whistleblowing.  This is assuming the Plaintiff in question wished to publicise such a matter and the costs associated in an area of law which is barely governed by judicial precedent and in which each case tends to stand heavily on its own facts.  

I am assuming, by your comments, that you have some reason to think this is a possible avenue of action?  Because I find it highly improbable.  I think the bad publicity for any charity in using its funds to support an extremely expensive libel action regarding concerns raised on a public forum against it would be so highly damaging that no charity would even wish to be tainted by such a suggestion (and indeed the Brooke have certainly implied nothing of the kind, and, I hope, would be shocked at such a scenario).

I am certainly in favour of openness when discussing the charities sector.  In fact, in the employment law sector, we are seeing a tendency towards ever-increasing legalised protection of whistleblowers (and it is of course the case that not all cases can be proven internally or even satisfactorally investigated first before the correct stage for making known areas of concern can be reached).  

I am sure that the Brooke will welcome such reports from members of the public on the ground, once they have had time to deal with this.


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			This almost sounds like a threat.  Its actually a little unclear what you mean here, but I am guessing you will contact the forum administrators with a view to having the thread pulled in case there is any risk of libel action against IPC, the parent company of H&H.  

I should therefore point out at this juncture that there is a great deal of difference between a successful defamation action, funded by a Plaintiff in the courts, and a company taking protective action on the basis of whistleblowing.  This is assuming the Plaintiff in question wished to publicise such a matter and the costs associated in an area of law which is barely governed by judicial precedent and in which each case tends to stand heavily on its own facts.  

I am assuming, by your comments, that you have some reason to think this is a possible avenue of action?  Because I find it highly improbable.  I think the bad publicity for any charity in using its funds to support an extremely expensive libel action regarding concerns raised on a public forum against it would be so highly damaging that no charity would even wish to be tainted by such a suggestion (and indeed the Brooke have certainly implied nothing of the kind, and, I hope, would be shocked at such a scenario).
		
Click to expand...

  

Okayyyyy....

No, I would like to know why we are unable do discuss other charities/products/people on here yet for others it is fine. 

Do you ever switch out of 'work' mode?


----------



## Mithras (2 May 2012)

rhino said:



  

Okayyyyy....

No, I would like to know why we are unable do discuss other charities/products/people on here yet for others it is fine. 

Do you ever switch out of 'work' mode? 

Click to expand...

Sorry?  I'm simply responding to what you're saying.  You can't on the one hand, raise serious legal questions and then on the other hand, say its they're not relevant when someone responds to answer them...;-)

But I really am for openness, and accountability, in the charities sector (as if no-one could be in doubt of that by now!)

As for your first point, I really couldn't say.  I would guess its partly button pushing, as for the rest, I'm not on here often enough to say.  Maybe a new thread on this topic?


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Sorry?  I'm simply responding to what you're saying.  You can't on the one hand, raise serious legal questions and then on the other hand, say its they're not relevant when someone responds to answer them...;-)

As for your first point, I really couldn't say.  I would guess its partly button pushing, as for the rest, I'm not on here often enough to say.  Maybe a new thread on this topic?
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware I had raised any _serious legal questions_  I just don't understand why one charity is allowed to be named and shamed and another one not, therefore knowing what IPC's take on the issue is would possibly help somewhat. I fail to see what starting another thread would do when my question is not aimed at other posters


----------



## FionaM12 (2 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			A good reply from no doubt a highly paid person in an office in London
		
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that your concerns aren't genuine and your account not valid, but I don't think little biased comments like this help your case. Surely you emailed the London office, so of course that's where the reply came from?  And what has the pay of their admin staff got to do with anything?  I hope they _do_ pay their staff properly, but I doubt it's a lot.

Digs like this make it look like you have a grudge IMO I'm afraid.


----------



## Freddie19 (2 May 2012)

Destiny95 said:



			A carefully worded statement could still have included 'thanks for bringing your concern to our attention and we will look into it'. 

I can't see anything in the statement that suggests they will look into it - internally or externally - which is a shame as it would have helped them to show they were acting on feedback.

We all want to see The Brooke to use their money as efficiently as possible to help animals in need - thats why we donate to them. Surely that is why the responses to this post are so passionate - because we don't want it to be true! I'd suggest feedback - good and especially bad - should be taken notice of by The Brooke. As you quite rightly say Rhino, they can't possibly be aware of everything going on across the charity...
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but in the email I sent to Brooke at the onset of this thread, they replied as I have said before, "we are investigating this claim" and are very aware of public posting.  As another poster said, I will not post on here their emails to me.   I was not going to get involved in this thread anymore, but it seems to be going from very bad to worse.  Could I please ask just one question of original poster, maybe I have missed them, but did you post on here the photographs?  If you  were not able to do so, did you send them to Brooke?  Have they replied to you, I personally would be very disappointed if they have not done so, as you must have lots of information to give them regarding this incident, including I would hope the name of the vet concerned...but please do not post that on here.


----------



## CatStew (2 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			Digs like this make it look like you have a grudge IMO I'm afraid.
		
Click to expand...

This!!

I've been following this thread with interest, and it does seem that the OP has a grudge against The Brooke, and is bias towards other charities.  Apologies if I'm wrong, but it does come across this way.  At the end of the day, the welfare of the animals in every country should be paramount for all animal charities, regardless of which charity it is.  Same steak, different gravy, if you like.

I feel that if anybody has any further questions regarding this incident, they should contact The Brooke directly (as The Brooke have already advised) rather then posting on an internet forum where the whole world and his wife can read it.  They will able to provide the definite facts.  I feel that if this thread continues, it could be detrimental not only to The Brooke, but it may also lead to people questioning where their regular donations/fundraising leads to.


----------



## Patterdale (2 May 2012)

It gets a bit heavy in here doesn't it..!? Courts, libels, plaintiffs..!

So far as I can see, someone posts a fairly serious accusation against a charity which makes others mistrust said charity and stop giving money. Charity takes enough notice to come on here and defend itself and is slammed for doing so. Charity defends itself again, again not good enough. What more can they do?

I agree that the OP shouldn't have said all that she did in the op (which by the way is very interesting when you have a re-read at this stage). Not because it is illegal - it's not. But I BELIEVE that it is morally just not the right way to go about it. This is backed up by the people cancelling standing orders etc off the back of it.*

The bottom line is, that unfortunately, s*** happens. Particularly in poorer countries.
*And it no doubt looks worse if you're not used to seeing it.*
For example, if a non farming person were to come into our lambing shed and take a look inside the old sack in the corner you may be shocked! But what looks cruel to some may not always be, particularly if housing know all the details.*

It sounds like this horse, whether or not he had a new fresh clean bed, had a better death than he would have had had the Brooke not been there. And surely that is the important thing here.*

And the fact that people are questioning why there were flies on a bleeding horse in the desert I find baffling.*

I feel for the Brooke here.*


----------



## Dirtymare (2 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			I'm not suggesting that your concerns aren't genuine and your account not valid, but I don't think little biased comments like this help your case. Surely you emailed the London office, so of course that's where the reply came from?  And what has the pay of their admin staff got to do with anything?  I hope they _do_ pay their staff properly, but I doubt it's a lot.

Digs like this make it look like you have a grudge IMO I'm afraid.
		
Click to expand...

^^^^^ This.
Having been a tourist in Egypt on many occasions, I feel qualified to comment on the type of people Egyptians are.
I feel that the vet's response to the OP was what I would expect from any professional -ie not wishing to divulge the true extent of the horse's injuries to a total stranger and a tourist at that.
Egyptians have very little concideration to their animals, and alot do seem to treat them like machines. I feel this is a cultural thing.
I have been to Luxor and seen some of the poor donkeys pulling huge carts full of stuff. I have seen them waiting out in the blistering sun without food or water. Some kind owners do tip the cart so the donkey has shade, but others dont.
I know Egypt is suffering from a poor tourist trade at present, and they rely on tourists for their living.
I know The Brook do outstanding work. If people stop their donations, think of the increased suffering poor horses and donkeys will have to endure without The Brook and other such charities.


----------



## Amymay (2 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			It gets a bit heavy in here doesn't it..!? Courts, libels, plaintiffs..!
		
Click to expand...

I suspect that if the Brooke were at all concerned about this thread, they would have asked for it's removal.

The fact that (unlike tin pot 'charities') they haven't is all credit to them.


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

amymay said:



			I suspect that if the Brooke were at all concerned about this thread, they would have asked for it's removal.

The fact that (unlike tin pot 'charities') they haven't is all credit to them.
		
Click to expand...

You're on the mark today amymay


----------



## touchstone (2 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			It gets a bit heavy in here doesn't it..!? Courts, libels, plaintiffs..!

So far as I can see, someone posts a fairly serious accusation against a charity which makes others mistrust said charity and stop giving money. Charity takes enough notice to come on here and defend itself and is slammed for doing so. Charity defends itself again, again not good enough. What more can they do?

I agree that the OP shouldn't have said all that she did in the op (which by the way is very interesting when you have a re-read at this stage). Not because it is illegal - it's not. But I BELIEVE that it is morally just not the right way to go about it. This is backed up by the people cancelling standing orders etc off the back of it.*

The bottom line is, that unfortunately, s*** happens. Particularly in poorer countries.
*And it no doubt looks worse if you're not used to seeing it.*
For example, if a non farming person were to come into our lambing shed and take a look inside the old sack in the corner you may be shocked! But what looks cruel to some may not always be, particularly if housing know all the details.*

It sounds like this horse, whether or not he had a new fresh clean bed, had a better death than he would have had had the Brooke not been there. And surely that is the important thing here.*

And the fact that people are questioning why there were flies on a bleeding horse in the desert I find baffling.*

I feel for the Brooke here.*
		
Click to expand...

Very well said, I completely agree.


----------



## Amymay (2 May 2012)

deleted.


----------



## mountainview22 (2 May 2012)

I feel that if anybody has any further questions regarding this incident, they should contact The Brooke directly (as The Brooke have already advised) rather then posting on an internet forum where the whole world and his wife can read it. They will able to provide the definite facts. I feel that if this thread continues, it could be detrimental not only to The Brooke, but it may also lead to people questioning where their regular donations/fundraising leads to.

I've kept out until now. 

This quote sticks out to me.
1. Why should the world and his wife know the answers? They have nothing to hide?

2. Why waste resources the charity has by asking the the same question 100 times via separate emails, why can't they save time which is money (wages) and answer here, remember, they have nothing to hide and it would save ALOT of man hours.

3. Any person who donates to a charity and doesn't wish to question what their money is being spent on either has too much money or only donate for the sake of it. 

IMO they've answered here twice, that's more than charities/people often do against allegations on here;
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=531292

Just for the record, I am on niether side here.

Said charity haven't really given an in depth reply to an investigation that really, against such strong accusations, needs a "proper" thorough look at.

OP blows the wind up another charities bum, why was she even at the Brooke if the other charity is so much better. Why didn't she ask for ace' vet to have a look, if they are that professional and experienced surely that wouldn't be a problem.

I'm sticking here on the wall.


----------



## Mithras (2 May 2012)

mountainview22 said:



			I feel that if anybody has any further questions regarding this incident, they should contact The Brooke directly (as The Brooke have already advised) rather then posting on an internet forum where the whole world and his wife can read it.
		
Click to expand...

Upon what authority are you telling people to do this?

Because I'm perfectly capable of making my own decisions, than you very much.  And what do you think of conflict of interest - whereby the issue is investigated by the organisation complained against?  Which already seems unable to quickly grasp the details of current goings on in its workload.



mountainview22 said:



			1. Why should the world and his wife know the answers? They have nothing to hide?
		
Click to expand...

In actual fact, the trend in the charities sector is towards transparency and accountability, not some fictional notion that charities should in some way be excluded from public discussion:

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/news/1029247/?DCMP=EMC-DailyBulletin

http://www.cklawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/vol80no2/Morris.pdf

The Charities Commission is "committed to openness and accountability": - http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/About_us/About_the_Commission/govframe.aspx



mountainview22 said:



			OP blows the wind up another charities bum, why was she even at the Brooke if the other charity is so much better. Why didn't she ask for ace' vet to have a look, if they are that professional and experienced surely that wouldn't be a problem.
		
Click to expand...

The Original Post explains that she was directed to the Brooke by her caleche driver, as the horse she had used the previous day was the one which had been injured.  One also assumes that the OP does not have the benefit of supernatural levels of hindsight.


----------



## Mithras (2 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			But I BELIEVE that it is morally just not the right way to go about it. This is backed up by the people cancelling standing orders etc off the back of it.
		
Click to expand...

You see, I feel that its morally very wrong to hush things up.  I think its morally lazy to assume the best standards are being met and to donate without question.


----------



## stormalong (2 May 2012)

Freddie - I did sent photographs to The Brooke.  I have posted 2 photographs (well my daughter did - I can type, but I am not computer literate).  We decided not to post the photo of the horse, it just did not seem right.  However The Brooke have seen it - and have commented on the injuries you can see in the photo - but not of the injuries you cannot see.  

Before I posted on this forum, a friend sent my account to The Brooke via their Facebook page, and had a response that they took this very seriously and would come back to us. 
Didn't receive anything.  I left it 48 hours before I decided to post on the forum.



Re the poster saying maybe the vet had had a very busy time that day and was just having a 10 min coffee break.  Well I did spend an hour there first thing in the morning, and the coffee break lasted the whole hour I was there.  The second time I visited he was sitting down chatting again.  That coffee break lasted quite a while too.  For your information on that day, and the following day, when I visited again, they had NO animals being treated in the stables.  They only have about 7 stables and they were empty.  Their main remit at the Luxor centre is to be available for the animals to have a wash (picture posted), and I did see someone rub some sudocrem cream onto a wound.  

Sorry have to go to work shortly, if there are any further queries posted I have not responded to, will reply either very late tonight, or tomorrow.


----------



## mountainview22 (2 May 2012)

Mithras, excuse outburst, personal situation has aided this.

Do me a favour. Use your brain, READ the post.

It was not my opinion, but a quote. I am on a mobile, unable to quote properly.

Second point, I agree, it was a spelling error. 

Third point. She apparently hates Brooke yeah?

Did the driver put a gun to her head and say get in there?

I'd hope not. No one made her enter the property of what she describes as con artists in as many words.

Now please, get your head from your backside, learn to read not scan and keep your silly belittling comments to yourself. 

I am still sat on the fence.


----------



## mountainview22 (2 May 2012)

Looking at your second post Mithras, it seems we actually agree on the whole transparency side of things. If you'd read my post in depth rather than scan you'd have saved my rantings.


----------



## AMH (2 May 2012)

I haven't read any of the OP's other posts. With regard to this thread, though, I'm afraid I'd give more credence to the validity of the OP's comments if there wasn't a blatant attempt to promote another charity. I don't understand the relevance of that to the allegations of poor treatment at the Brooke.


----------



## CathySirett (2 May 2012)

ah its always SO difficult when someone posts a personal experience that leads them to belive negative htings about a charity -- really hard to decide what to believe?

I know that every human has a bad day, that not the best organisation can keep track of what every individual involved with them does -- and I know some people involved with Brook here so really don't want to believe anything negative

however -- on the plus side I DO think that frequent oversight of geographically distant locations is essential otherwise things CAN slip or slide and affect the reputation of a wonderful organisation.....

Cathy


----------



## rhino (2 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			Before I posted on this forum, a friend sent my account to The Brooke via their Facebook page, and had a response that they took this very seriously and would come back to us. 
Didn't receive anything.  I left it 48 hours before I decided to post on the forum.
		
Click to expand...

If that's the post regarding the 'disturbing story' on Trip Advisor, then it was posted on 25th April, pm. Your OP is dated 26 April, early hours am. That's not 48 hours, it's barely 12 

Funnily enough the TA link is no longer active.


----------



## Goldenstar (2 May 2012)

AMH said:



			I haven't read any of the OP's other posts. With regard to this thread, though, I'm afraid I'd give more credence to the validity of the OP's comments if there wasn't a blatant attempt to promote another charity. I don't understand the relevance of that to the allegations of poor treatment at the Brooke.
		
Click to expand...

Yes i am with you I did comment at first and again around the PTS issue ( just because I have experiance of the cultural differences that can mean that animals do not get PTS)
OP first post makes my convinced that OP has a hidden agenda it was a worried by what saw post she says they are rotten to the core and ask for help to expose them .
The brooke much to their credit have allowed the thread to run I respect them for this and have seen the work they do to ease the misery of hard working horses I admire the way they try to work with people to ease these horses woes showing them how to fit packs to prevent galling providing watering points shade etc etc.
Many would have had the thread pulled because of the allegation of corruption the fact they have not makes me feel the Brooke has little to hide.
As for the vet being rude to her if the tone of her original post is anything to go by I sure she's a delight to deal with too.


----------



## lannerch (2 May 2012)

I must confess the Brooke as a charity are far more likely to get my support in the future after this thread.
There has ben some serious defamatory accusations made and instead of getting the thread pulled and poif it's gone they have looked into the accusations and responded in a very proffesional way and IMO answered all questions.
It is quite aparent the conditions for horses and donkeys out there are horrendous and they are making good out of a bad situation.
I hope all our equines appreciate how lucky they are!


----------



## Moomin1 (2 May 2012)

Personally the issues surrounding the horse where very subjective from a 'passer-by' point of view!

The OP's 'facts' of suffering and neglect were this:

The horse was laying down.

There were flies.

The horse had burst stitches on a wound the second visit.

The vet was having a coffee break and didn't appear to be panicking that the horse was laying down.

Seperate all of these facts and not one of them REALLY suggests any wrong doing in themselves.  The horse was laying down because it was injured and sedated.  There are flies in a hot country which are bound to be attracted to animals, particularly injured ones.  Stitches burst - particularly on large animals.  Vets do take coffee breaks and can't be running around like blue a*sed flies all the time.  They are professionals who deal with these issues every day and I have never yet seen a vet in 'panic mode', particularly not the older more experienced ones.

OP has seen a series of events, which to be fair is easily done, and assumed a negative scenario.

For instance, I once knew of a GSD which had it's tail amputated in an effort to stop it self mutilating.  The dog had been removed from a shed which was piled high with faeces and junk after being abandoned by the owners.  It was emaciated and developed an obsession with nibbling it's tail and spinning in circles. This in turn was stopping the dog from gaining weight.  In a final effort to try and rehabilitate the dog and address it's issues the vet advised amputating and retraining.  This vet is highly experienced and very well thought of.  The following morning, the vet team arrived to the surgery to find the kennel COVERED in blood - looked like a massacre, and the dog was lethargic.  It had mutilated it's legs etc so badly that it had haemorrhaged everywhere. Immediately pts.  Now for any passer-by that would undoubtedly look like negligence on the vet's behalf - but it wasn't - it was unavoidable and nobody could have foreseen that the dog was going to react that badly.  It had recieved the highest level of care and attention.

As for the dog with the broken legs that OP mentioned - well, if that did really happen then that is pretty bad, but I suppose if they don't have an x-ray machine it is difficult for them to diagnose breaks!


----------



## Goldenstar (2 May 2012)

In my last post I meanlt to type corrupt to the core not rotten sorry folks


----------



## stormalong (3 May 2012)

Regarding the posting that the reasons I thought the horse was suffering was a)  it was lying, down, b) flies and c) burst stitches, is not my prognosis at all.  

I know there are alot of postings now on this subject, but -

On my initial visit the horse was down, but it was sedated.  It did have significant large wounds that had been stitched.  However the vet assured me the horse would be fine, would require 3 weeks at the centre for recuperation.  I did not say he was on a coffee break, someone else previously suggested this might be the case.  In fact in a previous posting I said he was chatting with other Egyptians, I made no comment that he was drinking anything - because he wasn't.  Like I say I tell it how it is.  The truth is always the same.

I went away happy the horse was going to be ok.  I had used the caleche driver the previous day, he had a new horse, he was very proud of his horse.  He had given it an egyptian name, and when I asked him what it meant, he said Lucky.  How poignant is that?

It was on my second visit, roughly an hour and a half later when I returned, that I knew the horse was dying, and I was very concerned for the horse.  I believed it was suffering because -  the horses breathing was very laboured, it was losing a large amount of blood, the stitching had come open, and there was a large open wound.  The vet again told me the horse was fine, and would make a full recovery.  

Would you walk away from this scenario thinking all was well at this charity?  

Yes, many Egyptians do not look after their animals to the same standard that we do.  However, that is not the case of everyone out there.  There are many caleche drivers who do look after their horses well.  The Brooke and other charities in Egypt try to educate the local population on how best to care for their animals.  I would have hoped the vet in Luxor would have the same standard of care as an english vet, but it did not even come close.

Lots of people might have walked away and decided not to do anything at all.  After all the english are not great at complaining.  I had hoped the The Brooke would look into the level of care at the Luxor centre.  

Business's often welcome criticism where things are not up to scratch, it helps them to get stronger and improve.  If we say all is well, all the time, then standards slip.

I have been to Luxor, Egypt many times, and will continue to go on holiday there.  Every time we travel we take out 2 suitcases of supplies - tack for the caleche drivers headcollars etc, numnahs to contribute to padding under harnesses, fly fringes, dog collars, noseband covers to go over the many metal chains they put over the horse and donkeys noses, brushing boots, medical supplies and as much vet wrap as we can afford.  My vet and blacksmith also give me items to take out.

I will continue to help the horses and donkeys and other small animals out there the best I can, and reporting this incident was in an effort to improve things.  I could not hope to improve the standard of care there by saying nothing.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			I will continue to help the horses and donkeys and other small animals out there the best I can, and reporting this incident was in an effort to improve things.  I could not hope to improve the standard of care there by saying nothing.
		
Click to expand...

Where do you stand now then? I found a link to the Brooke's complaint procedure earlier and can look it out again for you?  As you obviously feel they are not telling the truth are you going to take it further?

If you have time could you also clarify the posting on the Brooke's facebook status by your friend, to put my pedanticness at ease? Was it the post referring to the (now deleted) tripadvisor comment?

Thanks, R


----------



## lannerch (3 May 2012)

And from your recent post op it now sounds like the vet did no wrong at all!
I too am very suspicious of you motives for this post in the first place, slating the Brooke like you have if sucessful will only result in more animals suffering do you really want that?!


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

OP has amended her tone considerably now, I hope she continues to enjoy going to Egypt and suggest she stays away from the Brooke which she clearly does not like.
However making an accusation of corruption in print on a public forum is a stupid thing to , to decide not to give to a certain charity is fine there's loads I won't give to. But tring to whip a reaction and stop people giving to a charity qwho works every day with live working horses is IMO not a nice thing to do.
This blunt and people will not like me saying this. But I am glad this poor little horse died what future for a drastically impaired horse somewhere like Egypt I am glad the Brooke don't have all singing and dancing X-ray machines and spent the money on people in the field adjusting harness doing parasite control and all the unglamorus stuff they do .
The PTS thing is a difficult one but it's an issue fraught with difficulties I know this for myself but you know it our upbringing that makes us think this and I debated this with a Muslim with differing views it's a reasoned position he took even though it was so different to mine.


----------



## Patterdale (3 May 2012)

To be fair if i were the vet in that situation and some tourist kept poking around asking if a severely injured horse was ok, I would probably just say 'yes it's fine' I doubt the vet thought to himself 'right, I'd better go along to the horse, discuss every part of my treatment and prognosis, and give a detailed report to this stranger western tourist.' 
I think you should just accept this and move on. 
The horse got hit by a bus and later died.
It had been given pain relief and sedated. 
There were flies on it's wounds. In the desert. 
The vet didn't sob over it and give you a detailed report. 

I'm thinking that maybe your expectations were a little high. It's Egypt, not the Royal Dick. Make it comfortable and hope for the best is usually all they can do - and much more than would be done were they not there. 

Give them a break!


----------



## FionaM12 (3 May 2012)

Am getting confused by the OP's account now. In her first post she says of her first witnessing of the horse:



stormalong said:



			What I witness shocked me to the core of my heart.

... I must say the horse did look in a very poor state, it was lying in alot of blood.  During my time here the vet spent all his time sat at a desk talking to other Egyptians.  I felt he should be monitoring the horse and not sat relaxing.
		
Click to expand...

But now she says:



stormalong said:



			I went away happy the horse was going to be ok.
		
Click to expand...

 

Also, up until now the OP seemed to be on a mission to get to the bottom of this and keen to keep this forum informed. But her last post suddenly seems to have changed tone and gives the impression she's washing her hands of the issue and that that will be her last post. Very odd.


----------



## Amymay (3 May 2012)

You're mis-reading her account.

Your second quote is from the first sighting.

Your first quote is from the second sighting.


----------



## FionaM12 (3 May 2012)

amymay said:



			You're mis-reading her account.

Your second quote is from the first sighting.

Your first quote is from the second sighting.
		
Click to expand...

No, I think you're wrong. I've got to dash to work now, but I've gone back and checked and am pretty certain my quotes are _both_ from the first sighting.


----------



## FionaM12 (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			Our caleche driver was alerted to the fact that a friends horse had been admitted to The Brooke, and was badly injuredafter being hit by a bus.  He told us it was the caleche driver and horse we had used the previous day, and a man we have known for several years.  What I witness shocked me to the core of my heart.

The horse was lying sedated on foam mats in a stable with a sand floor.  His wounds had been stitched up and he was covered in flies.  I went over to the vet and asked him about the condition of the horse.  He told me there were no broken bones, it just had superficial wounds,  however it would make a full recovery, and stay at the centre for 3 weeks to recuperate.  *I must say the horse did look in a very poor state, it was lying in alot of blood.  During my time here the vet spent all his time sat at a desk talking to other Egyptians.  I felt he should be monitoring the horse and not sat relaxing.*

We continued on our way to ACE, roughly 10 minutes further up the road. This is a much smaller charity set up 10 years ago, but their facilities are superb.  We were made welcome and given a guided tour of the facilities there and the current inmates.
		
Click to expand...

Amymay, here's my first quote in context. Definitely the first sighting.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

FionaM12 said:



			Amymay, here's my first quote in context. Definitely the first sighting.
		
Click to expand...

You're quite right Fiona, which also makes a later post somewhat confusing:



stormalong said:



			I did not know my husband had taken a photo while we were there, its one of those things you are so upset, and I did shed many tears that day.  I could have easily not gone to see the horse, infact at first I did refuse.  However I am pleased I did put myself through the ordeal, as I want the personnel there thoroughly investigated.
		
Click to expand...

If you were 'happy' that the horse was going to be ok, why did you initially 'refuse' then 'put yourself through the ordeal' of visiting again?

Also OP



stormalong said:



			Someone yesterday also sent a link to The Brooke's Facebook page for me, they replied that they would investigate for me.
		
Click to expand...

This also directly contradicts a later post, in which you stated that you had left it 48 hours before posting on here. You can see the date and time of the post on the Brooke's facebook page even now...

OP I've pm'd you.


----------



## Patterdale (3 May 2012)

Thread title is pretty unambiguous too......


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			Thread title is pretty unambiguous too......
		
Click to expand...

And probably close to libellous to.


----------



## Achinghips (3 May 2012)

Dear Ms Ingram



I read with interest your response to the thread recently posted on the Horse and Hound forum in relation to the unfortunate death of the horse in Luxor.  While I appreciate that the good works the Brooke generally do, I was surprised that your response did not address the details of the case which caused so much consternation amongst Horse and Hound members.  The details of particular concern were the flies laying over the horses ruptured stitches and also that the horses breathing had become laboured, and she was showing obvious signs of distress along with the bedding issue of where the horse lie.  These issues were not being properly addressed and although there is no  proof that suffering occurred, apart from photographs which are alluded to, the post I am afraid, will likely effect the reputation of The Brookes charity adversely leading to the withdrawal of funds by some members of the public.  



Please could you explain the veterinary surgeons response further to these specific issues?

Regards
                ----------------------------------------------




Dear Lisa,



Thank you for your email in relation to  the incident that occurred at our Luxor clinic , I am happy to address your specific concerns in more detail.



Regarding the flies, despite fly repellents (insecticides) being used by the vet around the wound,  it is impossible to completely control flies in the environments where we work. The clinic is not glazed in order to help with air flow, so unfortunately the presence of flies, whist unpleasant for staff and animals alike,  is inevitable. 



On the subject of the stitching, it is likely this ruptured due to the movement of the horse when recovering from the anaesthesia  this sometimes happens, particularly as we do not have controlled anaesthesia in our countries of operation.



We believe the laboured breathing was a result of the horse recovering from anaesthesia and the pain relief administered. It is not always  a sign of distress but may be seen as such by those who have not seen sedated or anaesthetised horses before, and I can imagine it was very upsetting for the lady who informed us of the situation to witness.



With regard to the bedding, as mentioned in my post, the mare was originally placed on a mattress inside a large box when she arrived at the clinic, so the wounds could be stitched. After this was completed, she remained in the box surrounded by small mattresses with straw as bedding. All photographs that have been provided to us show her laying on a mattress in a shaded area of the stable.



All our vets working in the Luxor centre are fully qualified, and the vet dealing with this case is extremely experienced. We support their ongoing education with a veterinary training programme which is led by our team in London. In addition we undertake clinical audits to ensure good practice is maintained.  I would like to assure you that our team in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  



We are always very sad when an animal in our care dies, but we do believe in this case everything that could be done was done to save her and to keep her as comfortable as possible under the circumstances.



I hope this will help to ease your concerns, but if you have any further questions at all please do contact me again.



Kind regards,



Petra Ingram



Chief Executive





The Brooke


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			Dear Ms Ingram



I read with interest your response to the thread recently posted on the Horse and Hound forum in relation to the unfortunate death of the horse in Luxor.  While I appreciate that the good works the Brooke generally do, I was surprised that your response did not address the details of the case which caused so much consternation amongst Horse and Hound members.  The details of particular concern were the flies laying over the horses ruptured stitches and also that the horses breathing had become laboured, and she was showing obvious signs of distress along with the bedding issue of where the horse lie.  These issues were not being properly addressed and although there is no  proof that suffering occurred, apart from photographs which are alluded to, the post I am afraid, will likely effect the reputation of The Brookes charity adversely leading to the withdrawal of funds by some members of the public.  



Please could you explain the veterinary surgeons response further to these specific issues?

Regards
                ----------------------------------------------




Dear Lisa,



Thank you for your email in relation to  the incident that occurred at our Luxor clinic , I am happy to address your specific concerns in more detail.Z



Regarding the flies, despite fly repellents (insecticides) being used by the vet around the wound,  it is impossible to completely control flies in the environments where we work. The clinic is not glazed in order to help with air flow, so unfortunately the presence of flies, whist unpleasant for staff and animals alike,  is inevitable. 



On the subject of the stitching, it is likely this ruptured due to the movement of the horse when recovering from the anaesthesia  this sometimes happens, particularly as we do not have controlled anaesthesia in our countries of operation.



We believe the laboured breathing was a result of the horse recovering from anaesthesia and the pain relief administered. It is not always  a sign of distress but may be seen as such by those who have not seen sedated or anaesthetised horses before, and I can imagine it was very upsetting for the lady who informed us of the situation to witness.



With regard to the bedding, as mentioned in my post, the mare was originally placed on a mattress inside a large box when she arrived at the clinic, so the wounds could be stitched. After this was completed, she remained in the box surrounded by small mattresses with straw as bedding. All photographs that have been provided to us show her laying on a mattress in a shaded area of the stable.



All our vets working in the Luxor centre are fully qualified, and the vet dealing with this case is extremely experienced. We support their ongoing education with a veterinary training programme which is led by our team in London. In addition we undertake clinical audits to ensure good practice is maintained.  I would like to assure you that our team in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  



We are always very sad when an animal in our care dies, but we do believe in this case everything that could be done was done to save her and to keep her as comfortable as possible under the circumstances.



I hope this will help to ease your concerns, but if you have any further questions at all please do contact me again.



Kind regards,



Petra Ingram



Chief Executive





The Brooke
		
Click to expand...

I glad the Brooke answered your email.
But please do not include me in any future letter you send please ensure you say something like caused consternation to SOME members of HHO I do not appreciate you thinking to had the right to attribute any censor of the brooke in this case to me.
Please do not do so again 
I will email the Brooke making this clear 
Thank you


----------



## Lark (3 May 2012)

Honey08 said:



			I think the OP has been completely credible from start to finish!  I can't believe people would doubt her.  But then again, those people have probably never been to a third world country and seen suffering - it really could make you so angry that you would come on here  and fire off a thread... It sticks in your mind.. If nothing else, among the accusations there were some useful suggestions on where to go next with the complaint..

OP good luck, and keep us posted.x
		
Click to expand...

Completely agree with this.

What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.


----------



## CatStew (3 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			Dear Ms Ingram



I read with interest your response to the thread recently posted on the Horse and Hound forum in relation to the unfortunate death of the horse in Luxor.  While I appreciate that the good works the Brooke generally do, I was surprised that your response did not address the details of the case which caused so much consternation amongst Horse and Hound members.  The details of particular concern were the flies laying over the horses ruptured stitches and also that the horses breathing had become laboured, and she was showing obvious signs of distress along with the bedding issue of where the horse lie.  These issues were not being properly addressed and although there is no  proof that suffering occurred, apart from photographs which are alluded to, the post I am afraid, will likely effect the reputation of The Brookes charity adversely leading to the withdrawal of funds by some members of the public.  



Please could you explain the veterinary surgeons response further to these specific issues?

Regards
                ----------------------------------------------




Dear Lisa,



Thank you for your email in relation to  the incident that occurred at our Luxor clinic , I am happy to address your specific concerns in more detail.



Regarding the flies, despite fly repellents (insecticides) being used by the vet around the wound,  it is impossible to completely control flies in the environments where we work. The clinic is not glazed in order to help with air flow, so unfortunately the presence of flies, whist unpleasant for staff and animals alike,  is inevitable. 



On the subject of the stitching, it is likely this ruptured due to the movement of the horse when recovering from the anaesthesia  this sometimes happens, particularly as we do not have controlled anaesthesia in our countries of operation.



We believe the laboured breathing was a result of the horse recovering from anaesthesia and the pain relief administered. It is not always  a sign of distress but may be seen as such by those who have not seen sedated or anaesthetised horses before, and I can imagine it was very upsetting for the lady who informed us of the situation to witness.



With regard to the bedding, as mentioned in my post, the mare was originally placed on a mattress inside a large box when she arrived at the clinic, so the wounds could be stitched. After this was completed, she remained in the box surrounded by small mattresses with straw as bedding. All photographs that have been provided to us show her laying on a mattress in a shaded area of the stable.



All our vets working in the Luxor centre are fully qualified, and the vet dealing with this case is extremely experienced. We support their ongoing education with a veterinary training programme which is led by our team in London. In addition we undertake clinical audits to ensure good practice is maintained.  I would like to assure you that our team in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  



We are always very sad when an animal in our care dies, but we do believe in this case everything that could be done was done to save her and to keep her as comfortable as possible under the circumstances.



I hope this will help to ease your concerns, but if you have any further questions at all please do contact me again.



Kind regards,



Petra Ingram



Chief Executive





The Brooke
		
Click to expand...


Thank you for posting this.  I personally feel that this is what the OP should have done in the first place, rather then making it so public.  I think people forget that the internet is a very powerful tool and as I said earlier, everybody can read the OP and be concerned for what actually happens at The Brooke, not only in Luxor, but at other locations too.  Hopefully this response will reassure people, and encourage people to carry on donating.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			Completely agree with this.

What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.
		
Click to expand...

Sicken you to the core why because some people don't aggree with you.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.
		
Click to expand...

Have you actually read the thread? OP herself has now changed her tune, and there are very serious concerns regarding the truth of her posts.

The 'real issue' should be the truth, and I'm guessing I'm not the only one who doesn't think we are getting it from the OP. If it is wrong to want the truth, then yes, I am very wrong.


----------



## Achinghips (3 May 2012)

Thank you for your appreciating my post Catstew.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			Thank you for your appreciating my post Catstew.
		
Click to expand...

Any chance of you saying sorry to me.


----------



## CatStew (3 May 2012)

Achinghips said:



			Thank you for your appreciating my post Catstew.
		
Click to expand...

No problem


----------



## xspiralx (3 May 2012)

Notwithstanding other issues, I don't believe the OP has been inconsistent in her reporting of the events.

Stating that she was 'happy the horse was going to be okay' is not the same thing as being happy about the situation - she's saying she felt reassured by the vet. It is perfectly possible to find something extremely upsetting to witness, and also to have reservations over the level of care provided - but then to be reassured that _despite_ distressing appearances, the horse would actually be okay.

I don't think there is any contradiction in the above.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			Completely agree with this.

What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your point - are you applauding the OP for accusing the Brooke of corruption (for which I have yet to see any credible evidence, even if the OP's version of these events is true)? 
Or are you suggesting that we 'people' being offended by a seemingly unfounded allegation is 'plain stupid'? Corruption is rather difficult to deduce from one incident.


----------



## touchstone (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			Completely agree with this.

What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.
		
Click to expand...

I think that the above quote could apply in equal measure to the OP to be truthful!  Nice that you think the posters who aren't quite behind the OP are plain stupid, how charming!


----------



## xspiralx (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Any chance of you saying sorry to me.
		
Click to expand...

Why on earth would she say sorry to you?

She said in her email "members of the Horse and Hound forum." She did not say ALL members of the Horse and Hound forum, so I have no idea why you're getting so up in arms about it, as you were never implicated in her email whatsoever. Furthermore, The Brooke are aware of this thread and can perfectly well see who has posted what on the matter.

Frankly, your post just smacks of attention seeking.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

xspiralx said:



			Why on earth would she say sorry to you?

She said in her email "members of the Horse and Hound forum." She did not say ALL members of the Horse and Hound forum, so I have no idea why you're getting so up in arms about it, as you were never implicated in her email whatsoever. Furthermore, The Brooke are aware of this thread and can perfectly well see who has posted what on the matter.

Frankly, your post just smacks of attention seeking.
		
Click to expand...

Among members, she attributed a view to me as I am a member she/ he has no right to do that to make a statement like that outside the forum ,itis not on she does not speak for all the members of HHO.
I not attention seeking but I feel very strongly about this you should not attribute views to others while writing to a third party .


----------



## xspiralx (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Among members, she attributed a view to me as I am a member she/ he has no right to do that to make a statement like that outside the forum ,itis not on she does not speak for all the members of HHO.
I not attention seeking but I feel very strongly about this you should not attribute views to others while writing to a third party .
		
Click to expand...

Stating 'among members' absolutely does not state she is speaking for 'all the members of HHO.' It means exactly what it says - that 'members' (more than one) have expressed concern.

Had she said "all the members of HHO" or indeed "members, including Goldenstar" you may have a point, but nobody in their right mind would assume the statement in her email meant that.


----------



## Charley (3 May 2012)

Oh dear oh dear. There appears to be a bunch of children in a playground arguing amongst themselves over irrelevant details.
Reasoned debate is always a good thing but try not to lose sight of the real issues raised in this post, bickering about what member said what to who and how is truly nonsense. 

OP well done for caring and for flagging up your concerns to The Brooke. There are always two sides to every story. The chances of The Brooke holding their hands up and saying there was a problem with the vet or the treatment? nil. But we can hope that in light of your report any processes and practices that need to be changed will be addressed as a result. That would be a definite upside.

There is a lot of criticism of The Brooke, a lot of which I have sympathy with. There are other charities I prefer to donate to. But it is personal decision and if I had been the OP and witnessed what she witnessed, i'd have flagged up my concerns too. Perhaps not in the same way but i'm pleased she did it nonetheless.

Now....you can all get back to your Play-dough fight


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

xspiralx said:



			Stating 'among members' absolutely does not state she is speaking for 'all the members of HHO.' It means exactly what it says - that 'members' (more than one) have expressed concern.

Had she said "all the members of HHO" or indeed "members, including Goldenstar" you may have a point, but nobody in their right mind would assume the statement in her email meant that. 

Click to expand...

Why when we don't agree do some people have to descend quickly to being unpleasant "not in My right mind "I just don't agree with you.
As you say what AH's wrote is ambiguous but you need to take care when you move outside of the forum into real life what anyone types on here a member can take up directly, not so once you have pressed send and it's with a third party its a different matter.


----------



## stormalong (3 May 2012)

Xspiralx - that it exactly how I was thinking, you have got me in one.  

The sight I saw the first time was not nice, however to be told the horse would be fine, just superficial injuries, I went away happy it was going to recover.  Why would I doubt the vet., its The Brooke for heavens sake the biggest animal charity abroad.

I doubted the vet when I returned!  Mats were out of the stable, it was now on sand.  The flies were in masses on its body, due to large open wounds, and blood was pouring out of it.
The vet still reiterated, from his seat, that the horse would be fine.  Would you believe him?
Would you walk away thinking all was well with this charity?  

I have been to Egypt a number of times, I know their perception of looking after their animals is different to ours.  However, that is the locals.  There are 2 other charities in Luxor that I know of, and their care is superior, I want The Brooke to raise their game and provide the same level of care.  If they decide not to invest in equipment, but provide good veterinary care then so be it.  

When you have been abroad and witnessed what can be achieved,  surely The Brooke's standards should be of the same level, not poorer.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			The sight I saw the first time was not nice, however to be told the horse would be fine, just superficial injuries, I went away happy it was going to recover.  Why would I doubt the vet., its The Brooke for heavens sake the biggest animal charity abroad.

I doubted the vet when I returned!  Mats were out of the stable, it was now on sand.  The flies were in masses on its body, due to large open wounds, and blood was pouring out of it.
The vet still reiterated, from his seat, that the horse would be fine.  Would you believe him?
Would you walk away thinking all was well with this charity?  

I have been to Egypt a number of times, I know their perception of looking after their animals is different to ours.  However, that is the locals.  There are 2 other charities in Luxor that I know of, and their care is superior, I want The Brooke to raise their game and provide the same level of care.  If they decide not to invest in equipment, but provide good veterinary care then so be it.  

When you have been abroad and witnessed what can be achieved,  surely The Brooke's standards should be of the same level, not poorer.
		
Click to expand...


As you may have missed it earlier



rhino said:



			Where do you stand now then? I found a link to the Brooke's complaint procedure earlier and can look it out again for you?  As you obviously feel they are not telling the truth are you going to take it further?

If you have time could you also clarify the posting on the Brooke's facebook status by your friend, to put my pedanticness at ease? Was it the post referring to the (now deleted) tripadvisor comment?

Thanks, R 

Click to expand...

Could you also check your messages pretty please


----------



## touchstone (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			The sight I saw the first time was not nice, however to be told the horse would be fine, just superficial injuries, I went away happy it was going to recover.  Why would I doubt the vet., its The Brooke for heavens sake the biggest animal charity abroad.

I doubted the vet when I returned!  Mats were out of the stable, it was now on sand.  The flies were in masses on its body, due to large open wounds, and blood was pouring out of it.
The vet still reiterated, from his seat, that the horse would be fine.  Would you believe him?
Would you walk away thinking all was well with this charity?  

When you have been abroad and witnessed what can be achieved,  surely The Brooke's standards should be of the same level, not poorer.
		
Click to expand...

In the first instance I suspect it was highly unlikely that the vet was going to say that the horse would probably die, causing you obvious distress.  

The horse was off mats and placed on straw according to the photographs you provided?  Flies are understandable and sadly stitches do rupture.  I also suspect that at this point the vet was unable to do more for the horse and knew the likely outcome, but wasn't prepared to say it outright to a tourist.

Would I walk away thinking all was well?  - I'd probably think harder still about what a hard life these horses have and how better to help more of them.  In my opinion the Brooke did what it could under the circumstances; they patched up the horse, gave it sedative and pain relief. What else could they have done?  If the wounds were extensive there may have been little skin that would hold left to stitch anyway, especially after they had already ruptured. There are horses that die every day in the uk, even with high standards of veterinary treatment, recovering after surgery.

I don't believe that in this instance the Brooke 'caused suffering' I think they did what they could to alleviate it under the circumstances.


----------



## Lark (3 May 2012)

touchstone said:



			I think that the above quote could apply in equal measure to the OP to be truthful!  Nice that you think the posters who aren't quite behind the OP are plain stupid, how charming!
		
Click to expand...

To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.
		
Click to expand...

I would struggle to believe that any of the posters would question or disagree with that statement 




			And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.
		
Click to expand...

Wasn't it in essence one person's assertions that an animal was suffering, and that the suffering was preventable? Do you think everyone should have taken the OP at face value? Do you believe that _everything_ you read on here is true?


----------



## Moomin1 (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware&#8217; of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.
		
Click to expand...

You make some valid points about damned if you do, damned if you don't on this forum - it quite often is like that on here.  However, in this instance it appears the OP has a few inconsistencies and has also, to be quite blunt, made an assumpion that the horse was in a suffering state due to Brooke's negligence just because of a moment in time that she witness.  She wasn't in receipt of all of the facts surrounding the horse's care - she merely witnessed it in the box recovering from anaesthetic.  I fully agree with Brooke's statement - there is nothing they can do about flies, stitches do burst, the horse was heavy breathing because of the sedation -my horse pours with sweat and groans when she has sedation (within seconds) - it happens.

It is HIGHLY damaging and can cripple charities when people put things like this on public forums without being ABSOLUTELY certain that they have been negligent.  Reputations stick unfortunately and it only takes a few posts like this (which are merely the OP's interpretation of what she saw - NOT fact) to ruin a perfectly decent charity.

As for 80% of donations going to admin fees in some charities - I would beg to differ on the statistics - but I am not sure on exact numbers.  I do wonder though how it is that people can think charities don't have to spend money on admin?!!  They do have to be efficient in their paperwork in order to be succesful and survive!  Decent admin teams can be the key to succesful prosecutions/welfare causes/research etc etc and I wouldn't be unhappy for my donations to go towards that.


----------



## CatStew (3 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			You make some valid points about damned if you do, damned if you don't on this forum - it quite often is like that on here.  However, in this instance it appears the OP has a few inconsistencies and has also, to be quite blunt, made an assumpion that the horse was in a suffering state due to Brooke's negligence just because of a moment in time that she witness.  She wasn't in receipt of all of the facts surrounding the horse's care - she merely witnessed it in the box recovering from anaesthetic.  I fully agree with Brooke's statement - there is nothing they can do about flies, stitches do burst, the horse was heavy breathing because of the sedation -my horse pours with sweat and groans when she has sedation (within seconds) - it happens.

*It is HIGHLY damaging and can cripple charities when people put things like this on public forums without being ABSOLUTELY certain that they have been negligent.  Reputations stick unfortunately and it only takes a few posts like this (which are merely the OP's interpretation of what she saw - NOT fact) to ruin a perfectly decent charity.*

As for 80% of donations going to admin fees in some charities - I would beg to differ on the statistics - but I am not sure on exact numbers.  I do wonder though how it is that people can think charities don't have to spend money on admin?!!  They do have to be efficient in their paperwork in order to be succesful and survive!  Decent admin teams can be the key to succesful prosecutions/welfare causes/research etc etc and I wouldn't be unhappy for my donations to go towards that.
		
Click to expand...

This!  In particular the bit in bold.


----------



## Lark (3 May 2012)

rhino said:



			I would struggle to believe that any of the posters would question or disagree with that statement 

Click to expand...

It certainly appeared that way from some of the initial responses I read.



rhino said:



			Wasn't it in essence one person's assertions that an animal was suffering, and that the suffering was preventable? Do you think everyone should have taken the OP at face value? Do you believe that _everything_ you read on here is true? 

Click to expand...

Of course not, that would be equally naive but do you think that the responders who slated the OP immediately had any greater proof that warranted such a catalogue of abuse?

Again, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

From here I will retire.  There is a reason I never post in here, unfortunately I obviously lost my wits for a moment.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware&#8217; of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.
		
Click to expand...

Considering this IS HHO, I have found this to be quite a grown-up discussion, actually! There's been far less mudslinging (certain posters excepted) than I've been used to. 

Some people have asked to see the evidence - I appreciate that the OP found it hard to post the photos on here (I've struggled with that too!), and I also understand her concerns if the photos are graphic (which it sounds as if they are) but she could have asked people to PM e-mail addresses and e-mailed them over. 

Language can be very emotive. For example, using the word 'pouring' to describe the animal's blood loss sounds unneccessarily emotive to me - if blood was literally pouring out of the horse, it would have been dead in a very short space of time. It's this (amongst other examples, like the 'corrupt to the core' statement), as well as the mention of another charity in contrast to the OP's experience at the Brooke, which lead me to be sceptical. 

No-one on this forum would condone cruelty to animals or the unnecessary prolongation of suffering. And it's very difficult for us to comment without having been there at the time. But I'm afraid the OP opened herself up to question with her post, and must accept that people will want to debate the issues raised.


----------



## touchstone (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.
		
Click to expand...

Of course corruption goes on, but there is little evidence for it in this case in my opinion, and the treatment of the horse was also well explained, again in my opinion.   Was the OP right to voice concerns?  I'd say after contacting the Brooke initially and not receiving satisfaction it would have been a more appropriate action.  Raising awareness is one thing, making assumptions and allegations is another and can be extremely damaging to any charity and the animals that depend on it.   Jumping blindly on a bandwagon accusing a charity of corruption and ill treatment when in my opinion there was no evidence for this is a dangerous and more stupid thing to do, don't you think?


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

CatStew said:



			Thank you for posting this.  I personally feel that this is what the OP should have done in the first place, rather then making it so public.  I think people forget that the internet is a very powerful tool and as I said earlier, everybody can read the OP and be concerned for what actually happens at The Brooke, not only in Luxor, but at other locations too.  Hopefully this response will reassure people, and encourage people to carry on donating.
		
Click to expand...

Very general comments by the Brooke to the specific issues affecting this mare.  I could have made those comments, without any knowledge of the individual facts, as could just about anyone.  I do find it astonishing that a charity set up to promote horse welfare in one geographical area should have to be asked to investigate its ongoing work to provide answers to welfare concerns.  I should have thought that all cases should be logged with as many details provided as possible.  Otherwise, how can it be accountable as to how and where the funds it raises are going?

I don't see why the Brooke cannot provide a fly free operating and recovery environment, when it can provide large air conditioned offices for its staff in Egypt.

I am horrified by the gullibility of some HHO members on here, who seem to wish to willfully participate in some cover up, rather than investigating the truth.  Without wishing to go into specifics without evidence, I for one have certainly heard similar things about the charity in question (while not wishing to denigrate any good work that it does do).  I cannot imagine why anyone would want to hush up the OP, or what motives they would have in doing so.  

As someone who has worked professionally in the regulation of the charities sector in the past, so much that has been said suggesting that the OP should have complained only via the charity itself (clear conflict of interest) is just utter nonsense.  The whole ethos of regulation of the charities sector is towards increased openness and accountability, so to suggest the opposite is not only obstructive, but suspicious.  I cannot see why anyone in their right mind could possibly object to a charity being open and accountable, and indeed held to account publicly (as they are public bodies) when someone believes they have witnessed an example of wrongdoing by it first hand.

Indeed, this case presents an excellent opportunity for the Brooke to demonstrate outstanding committment to its causes and in dealing with concerns of members of the public.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I cannot imagine why anyone would want to hush up the OP, or what motives they would have in doing so.
		
Click to expand...

Unnecessarily inflammatory. Not everyone has an ulterior motive, some of us like to have the facts before we condone condemnation to the level of the original post.


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

AMH said:



			Unnecessarily inflammatory. Not everyone has an ulterior motive, some of us like to have the facts before we condone condemnation to the level of the original post.
		
Click to expand...

So why then assume that the charity must be in the right, the OP is wrong and the OP is further wrong by using her best endeavours to bring her concerns to public light?


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			Completely agree with this.

What is wrong with you People??
Seriously some of the people that have posted sicken me to the core.
Any excuse to cause trouble for the sake of it and detract from the real issue.
Or maybe just plain stupid (more likely) or naive - a corrupt charity!! why I Never!! pffffffff...get a grip.

OP is to be applauded for bringing this to the attention of the wider public.
		
Click to expand...

My thoughts entirely.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			So why then assume that the charity must be in the right, the OP is wrong and the OP is further wrong by using her best endeavours to bring her concerns to public light?
		
Click to expand...

I haven't - but if you read my post above you'll see why I'm sceptical.


----------



## Moomin1 (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Very general comments by the Brooke to the specific issues affecting this mare.  I could have made those comments, without any knowledge of the individual facts, as could just about anyone.  I do find it astonishing that a charity set up to promote horse welfare in one geographical area should have to be asked to investigate its ongoing work to provide answers to welfare concerns.  I should have thought that all cases should be logged with as many details provided as possible.  Otherwise, how can it be accountable as to how and where the funds it raises are going?

I don't see why the Brooke cannot provide a fly free operating and recovery environment, when it can provide large air conditioned offices for its staff in Egypt.

I am horrified by the gullibility of some HHO members on here, who seem to wish to willfully participate in some cover up, rather than investigating the truth.  Without wishing to go into specifics without evidence, I for one have certainly heard similar things about the charity in question (while not wishing to denigrate any good work that it does do).  I cannot imagine why anyone would want to hush up the OP, or what motives they would have in doing so.  

As someone who has worked professionally in the regulation of the charities sector in the past, so much that has been said suggesting that the OP should have complained only via the charity itself (clear conflict of interest) is just utter nonsense.  The whole ethos of regulation of the charities sector is towards increased openness and accountability, so to suggest the opposite is not only obstructive, but suspicious.  I cannot see why anyone in their right mind could possibly object to a charity being open and accountable, and indeed held to account publicly (as they are public bodies) when someone believes they have witnessed an example of wrongdoing by it first hand.

Indeed, this case presents an excellent opportunity for the Brooke to demonstrate outstanding committment to its causes and in dealing with concerns of members of the public.
		
Click to expand...

Personally I think that Brooke have given as detailed a response as they should have to.  If someone isn't satisfied with their explanation - then they should maybe get off their jacksies and raise some money to pay for an external investigation to take place?  That would surely be a good step for animal welfare rather than sitting moaning about it on here.  Does make me mad when people go on about how much they care for animal welfare and how this and that charity are useless - but what DO these people actually do about it other than moan?!

As for witnessing some wrong doing - what wrong doing was there in relation to the horse?!! I'm still baffled?!  Flies, in Egypt, around an animal?!  Burst stitches - on a large animal which is coming around from sedation?!  A vet sitting at a desk who commented that the horse should recover?!!  None of those indicate negligence to be honest - the only way anybody would be able to know if there was negligence is to have another qualified vet examine the body and the clinical notes relating to that horse.


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

AMH said:



			I haven't - but if you read my post above you'll see why I'm sceptical.
		
Click to expand...

In response to your earlier post: 



AMH said:



			I'm not sure I understand your point - are you applauding the OP for accusing the Brooke of corruption (for which I have yet to see any credible evidence, even if the OP's version of these events is true)? 
Or are you suggesting that we 'people' being offended by a seemingly unfounded allegation is 'plain stupid'? Corruption is rather difficult to deduce from one incident.
		
Click to expand...

I would not say the OP is suggesting corruption, but rather delivery of a service in a non-satisfactory way - the public blurb of the Charities Regulator does not say that they will ONLY investigate corruption/financial irregularities but in essence that is all that they will investigate.  Therefore concerns such as the OP's, unless they are related to corruption, will go unchecked in the charities sector, unless the charity itself is prepared to do something.  The CR simply does not have powers to investigate public queries about delivery of a service by a charity.

Corruption would of course be difficult to deduce from this one incident, but that is not what the OP is alleging.  And of course any deduction of liability is well nigh impossible to judge until all the evidence is weighed up and some kind of hearing held.  That does not however imply that such evidence should never reach public ears, particularly when there is never going to be an appropriate forum to hold such a hearing.


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			Personally I think that Brooke have given as detailed a response as they should have to.  If someone isn't satisfied with their explanation - then they should maybe get off their jacksies and raise some money to pay for an external investigation to take place?  That would surely be a good step for animal welfare rather than sitting moaning about it on here.  Does make me mad when people go on about how much they care for animal welfare and how this and that charity are useless - but what DO these people actually do about it other than moan?!.
		
Click to expand...

I don't want to make an issue of this, but I donate to another equine welfare charity in Egypt.  

I see no reason whatsoever why a large, well funded organisation such as the Brooke should not have access to logged cases which it deals with.  I would have thought it a very basic and obvious system to have in place.



Moomin1 said:



			As for witnessing some wrong doing - what wrong doing was there in relation to the horse?!! I'm still baffled?!  Flies, in Egypt, around an animal?!  Burst stitches - on a large animal which is coming around from sedation?!  A vet sitting at a desk who commented that the horse should recover?!!  None of those indicate negligence to be honest - the only way anybody would be able to know if there was negligence is to have another qualified vet examine the body and the clinical notes relating to that horse.
		
Click to expand...

One would have thought these would have been available to the Brooke by now, and a more detailed explanation forthcoming.


----------



## cronkmooar (3 May 2012)

OK, so after about 3 days I have finally got to the end of the thread - and to be honest I have no idea if the OP is just trying to drum up some business for the other charity or whether there really is a genuine concerns about this particular Brooke hospital.

I dont donate to the Brooke - apart from buying a wrist band at HOYS each year - so I am not an interested party in respect of where my donations are going - and I do accept that some countries do not do things as I personally would expect them to be done (I wont use "we" just in case there is another ding dong about including people in statements without their permission!)

However, there is one thing that has been said that is just not sitting right with me if it is indeed true:-

The OP has stated on more than one occassion that the horse was lying down with ruptured stitches and was loosing a lot of blood, and whilst the horse was in this state the vet was sat at a desk/talking (can't be arsed looking back to see exactly what it was so going from memory and its a long thread!)

This concerns me.  I don't know any vet that would leave an animal like this.

The Brooke should be ensuring that a certain standard of care is maintained and if their vets (the one in question is stated by them to be very experienced) think this is acceptable then I think some additional training may be in order.

If donations are collected from a country where this would not be acceptable it is only natural to assume that the same level of care will be provided to any animal treated by the charity that you have donated to - no matter which country this is carried out in.

As I said, I do not dontate to the Brooke, but this thread would make me think twice about buying anything off their stand at HOYS again.

ETA I am also extremely surprised that they do not have an x-ray machine - even the smallest practice has a portable - and I can think of a number of organisations that could have been approached to donate an old one, but IF this charity has the amount of money it is supposed to (I think 14Mill was mentioned) whats the biggy in buying one?


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			In response to your earlier post: 

I would not say the OP is suggesting corruption, but rather delivery of a service in a non-satisfactory way - the public blurb of the Charities Regulator does not say that they will ONLY investigate corruption/financial irregularities but in essence that is all that they will investigate.  Therefore concerns such as the OP's, unless they are related to corruption, will go unchecked in the charities sector, unless the charity itself is prepared to do something.  The CR simply does not have powers to investigate public queries about delivery of a service by a charity.

Corruption would of course be difficult to deduce from this one incident, but that is not what the OP is alleging.  And of course any deduction of liability is well nigh impossible to judge until all the evidence is weighed up and some kind of hearing held.  That does not however imply that such evidence should never reach public ears, particularly when there is never going to be an appropriate forum to hold such a hearing.
		
Click to expand...

The OP is quoted earlier as saying that the organisation is 'corrupt to the core'. I appreciate that this could be seen as a side-track, but corruption is absolutely what the OP is alleging, because that's the word she used.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			One would have thought these would have been available to the Brooke by now, and a more detailed explanation forthcoming.
		
Click to expand...

Mithras, OP didn't report this until 2 weeks after the horse's death, so there is no way the body could be examined or any post mortem done .


----------



## Moomin1 (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I don't want to make an issue of this, but I donate to another equine welfare charity in Egypt.  

I see no reason whatsoever why a large, well funded organisation such as the Brooke should not have access to logged cases which it deals with.  I would have thought it a very basic and obvious system to have in place.



One would have thought these would have been available to the Brooke by now, and a more detailed explanation forthcoming.
		
Click to expand...

They will be available to Brooke - but why should they place them for all to see on a public forum?!  It is NOT for any Tom Dick or Harry to review vet notes and make an expert opinion on them.  

The way these things work is that whoever is concerned usually pays for their own expert witness to review the evidence (a vet) and they will decide if there is a case to answer.  So - all of those people who do not believe Brooke - why don't you do that?

As for the burst stitches - OP saw those on her second visit - it was not left between the first and second visit with burst stitches.


----------



## touchstone (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			In response to your earlier post: 

I would not say the OP is suggesting corruption, but rather delivery of a service in a non-satisfactory way - the public blurb of the Charities Regulator does not say that they will ONLY investigate corruption/financial irregularities but in essence that is all that they will investigate.  Therefore concerns such as the OP's, unless they are related to corruption, will go unchecked in the charities sector, unless the charity itself is prepared to do something.  The CR simply does not have powers to investigate public queries about delivery of a service by a charity.

Corruption would of course be difficult to deduce from this one incident, but that is not what the OP is alleging.  And of course any deduction of liability is well nigh impossible to judge until all the evidence is weighed up and some kind of hearing held.  That does not however imply that such evidence should never reach public ears, particularly when there is never going to be an appropriate forum to hold such a hearing.
		
Click to expand...


I'd disagree that the OP isn't alleging corruption to quote:- "This Charity is corrupt to the core, and the injured horse was neglected and left to die in pain and agony"

Anyway, this thread seems to be going in circles, so I'm dropping out now, but still can't see how the Brooke are supposed to have been negligent in any way, shape or form.  Perhaps I'm just stupid  I will however continue to support the Brooke and the animals that so desperately need help.


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

rhino said:



			Mithras, OP didn't report this until 2 weeks after the horse's death, so there is no way the body could be examined or any post mortem done .
		
Click to expand...

That is why the charity should have a reasonably detailed record of its cases.  I'm not suggesting a post-mortem, simply some basic logging in information that can easily be shared between its staff on the ground and its HQ and main fundraising arm.  I am honestly shocked that such a basic system is not in place.

I find it quite obvious that the OP is not necessarily the most foresighted narrator (in terms of judging what goes down well to the HHO "jury") and occasionally is quite emotive.  I don't get the impression she is out to promote another charity (and even if she were, if she genuinely thought it was in the interests of equine welfare, this would not be morally wrong).  I also get the impression that any emotive comments are due to her genuine shock and dismay at what she witnessed.

I used to donate to the Brooke.  I now donate to another equine charity in Egypt.  I am not going to go into why I have made this choice.  I think the Brooke is a great organisation, certainly in the past, the aims it was set up for are very laudable.

I was not impressed by the general and condescending latest statement by the Brooke one little bit.  It was peppered by phrases such as "it is likely that" and "we believe that".  The complainant was referred to as "the lady" and I thought slightly belittled.  However there are some of us who see perhaps all too readily through this sort of pr blurb, and there was nothing of substance in the latest response.  As I said, I or indeed anyone, who had no knowledge of the individual case, could have written it.

I cannot see why people think its unreasonable, bearing in mind charities are expected to be both open and accountable, to actually know what work they are carrying out on the ground when specifically questioned about it - the Brooke is quite a large charity but still relatively manageable compared to some.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.
		
Click to expand...

I do believe the tone of the first post was a mistake
To accuse a charity of corruption with no evidence of corruption to a serious thing to do .
Even if you accept That there issuses with this horses care( which I do not on the evidence given) it does not amount to corruption.
You can't call posts unconstructive  unhelpful etc because people don't take the same view as OP.
The brooke did not cause this horses suffering the RTA did that if I remember rightly OP said a one point she thought they should have moved the horse to some where with an X-ray machine  ( why an xray would help a horses who was bleeding I don't know)  
how could they have moved it, from her description it does not seem that would have been possible.
I glad the poor little thing died in peace off the street. 
People are allowed views and in reply to an original post likt this you one you are going to get strong views that disagree that is what the forum is about.


----------



## cronkmooar (3 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			As for the burst stitches - OP saw those on her second visit - it was not left between the first and second visit with burst stitches.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure if this is in response to my thread - but just to clarify - my understanding was that it was on the second visit that this was seen, however, when the OP seen this the vet was not making any attempt to rectify the situation but was just sat at a desk or chatting - as mentioned my memory is not clear on that and I cant be bothered trailing back!)

I did not think the horse had been left between visits like this - I would however have expected a vet to do something about burst stitches and quite a lot of blood loss and not just sat there doing sweet FA


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			That is why the charity should have a reasonably detailed record of its cases.  I'm not suggesting a post-mortem, simply some basic logging in information that can easily be shared between its staff on the ground and its HQ and main fundraising arm.  I am honestly shocked that such a basic system is not in place.

I find it quite obvious that the OP is not necessarily the most foresighted narrator (in terms of judging what goes down well to the HHO "jury") and occasionally is quite emotive.  I don't get the impression she is out to promote another charity (and even if she were, if she genuinely thought it was in the interests of equine welfare, this would not be morally wrong).  I also get the impression that any emotive comments are due to her genuine shock and dismay at what she witnessed.

I used to donate to the Brooke.  I now donate to another equine charity in Egypt.  I am not going to go into why I have made this choice.  I think the Brooke is a great organisation, certainly in the past, the aims it was set up for are very laudable.
I was not impressed by the general and condescending latest statement by the Brooke one little bit.  It was peppered by phrases such as "it is likely that" and "we believe that".  The complainant was referred to as "the lady" and I thought slightly belittled.  However there are some of us who see perhaps all too readily through this sort of pr blurb, and there was nothing of substance in the latest response.  As I said, I or indeed anyone, who had no knowledge of the individual case, could have written it.

I cannot see why people think its unreasonable, bearing in mind charities are expected to be both open and accountable, to actually know what work they are carrying out on the ground when specifically questioned about it - the Brooke is quite a large charity but still relatively manageable compared to some.
		
Click to expand...

I have no issue with op questioning what she saw but I have an issue with being asked to help expose corruption and then being given no evidence of it.


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I have no issue with op questioning what she saw but I have an issue with being asked to help expose corruption and then being given no evidence of it.
		
Click to expand...

I would refer you to my previous post (my apologies as there are a fair number) on the difference between corruption and deficient delivery of a service in the charities sector.


----------



## Amymay (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I have no issue with op questioning what she saw but I have an issue with being asked to help expose corruption and then being given no evidence of it.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think you have have you?


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I would refer you to my previous post (my apologies as there are a fair number) on the difference between corruption and deficient delivery of a service in the charities sector.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry to butt in, but I would refer you to my previous post regarding the OP's use of the word 'corrupt'. I would ask the OP to clarify what she feels constitutes corruption.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

amymay said:



			I don't think you have have you?
		
Click to expand...

From the first post" this charity is corrupt to the core" and  " please help me expose this charity" .


----------



## stormalong (3 May 2012)

When you go out to Luxor and see the facilities at The Brooke, and the other 2 charities out there.  You witness the care, or lack of care given to 2 animals, and then you look into how much money each of the charities raise.  Now I appreciate The Brooke have other outposts, however where is the money going to??  That's one of my concerns - why does the charity with the largest income by far, have such poor facilities, and a vet well......
words fail me, at his lack of care.  The money is not going to the animals, it must be going elsewhere.  

I went to The Brooke the day after the horse died too.  I haven't dare go into what I say that day.  However, as they say, that's another story.  I had subjected myself to enough heartache.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			When you go out to Luxor and see the facilities at The Brooke, and the other 2 charities out there.  You witness the care, or lack of care given to 2 animals, and then you look into how much money each of the charities raise.  Now I appreciate The Brooke have other outposts, however where is the money going to??  That's one of my concerns - why does the charity with the largest income by far, have such poor facilities, and a vet well......
words fail me, at his lack of care.  The money is not going to the animals, it must be going elsewhere.  

I went to The Brooke the day after the horse died too.  I haven't dare go into what I say that day.  However, as they say, that's another story.  I had subjected myself to enough heartache.
		
Click to expand...

If what you saw the day after the horse died was worse than what you've already told us you've seen, have you raised that with the charity too? 

And, for that matter, have you raised with them the point about their funding levels? Or if you already have, could you let us know what they told you? Their published accounts will give details of their spending distribution.


----------



## Hells Bells (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			When you go out to Luxor and see the facilities at The Brooke, and the other 2 charities out there.  You witness the care, or *lack of care *given to 2 animals, and then you look into how much money each of the charities raise.  Now I appreciate The Brooke have other outposts, however where is the money going to??  That's one of my concerns - why does the charity with the largest income by far, have such poor facilities, and a vet well......
words fail me, at his *lack of care*.  The money is not going to the animals, it must be going elsewhere.  

I went to The Brooke the day after the horse died too. * I haven't dare go into what I say that day*.  However, as they say, that's another story.  I had subjected myself to enough heartache.
		
Click to expand...

I personally, do not feel there has been a case for his lack of care at all. The Brooke's response to the email quoted earlier explained all of the issues you had, I feel. It needs to be remembered that they cannot provide the level of care that we are so lucky to be able to afford over here.

And as for what you saw the other day...well, I think it's probably best you do not raise that here.


----------



## rhino (3 May 2012)

Let's try once more



rhino said:



			Where do you stand now then? I found a link to the Brooke's complaint procedure earlier and can look it out again for you?  As you obviously feel they are not telling the truth are you going to take it further?

If you have time could you also clarify the posting on the Brooke's facebook status by your friend, to put my pedanticness at ease? Was it the post referring to the (now deleted) tripadvisor comment?

Thanks, R 

Click to expand...

I find it difficult to believe that anyone who is apparently so passionate about welfare, and who I would expect to have a good knowledge of medical issues, will not follow through such serious allegations. 

'Anonymous' forums are a very good way of making a lot of noise. Sometimes that can be for the good, but action would be better.


----------



## fburton (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			So why then assume that the charity must be in the right, the OP is wrong and the OP is further wrong by using her best endeavours to bring her concerns to public light?
		
Click to expand...

It is surely better to err on the side of giving the charity the benefit of the doubt _until a proper investigation is done and the full facts known_. Why? Because of the potential consequences of assuming that the charity is in the wrong when actually they are in the right is that considerable damage is done to their reputation and hence in their ability to attract donations and to help equines. On the other hand, the potential consequences of assuming that OP is in the wrong when actually she is in the right is that one person's reputation is dented - not such a big deal!


----------



## Mithras (3 May 2012)

fburton said:



			It is surely better to err on the side of giving the charity the benefit of the doubt _until a proper investigation is done and the full facts known_. Why? Because of the potential consequences of assuming that the charity is in the wrong when actually they are in the right is that considerable damage is done to their reputation and hence in their ability to attract donations and to help equines. On the other hand, the potential consequences of assuming that OP is in the wrong when actually she is in the right is that one person's reputation is dented - not such a big deal!
		
Click to expand...

That sounds absolutely lovely.  However we are not going to get a "proper investigation done".  No police force is going to investigate with all the experience of gathering evidence and weighing up whether the CPS will find it suitable, no lawyers are likely to be employed to do the same in a civil case.  What is most likely to happen is that there will be a minor "investigation" by the charity involved, which, if lucky, will not be a pr exercise, but which will, due to the very fact that it is the charity itself carrying it out, be in conflict of interest.  However since, in my personal opinion, the charity seems to have somewhat distant record keeping processes, if at all, I wonder how that investigation can be properly facilitated, post partum.

Surely there should be in place, as well as basic record keeping of cases available to HQ, a scheduled review of cases dealt with on a frequent basis?

I, for one, am perfectly capable of making up my own mind on evidence publicly available from a variety of sources on which charities to donate to.  I would assume that the average person of sound mind is equally able to do so.


----------



## wizzlewoo (3 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			Now I appreciate The Brooke have other outposts, however where is the money going to??
		
Click to expand...

I have stayed as an observer until now but I find it difficult to understand how someone can post about a cause when they have done no apparent further research into. I spent 2 minutes looking at the Brook's website and found their complete annual finance report from the past 5 years showing exactly where the money is going right down to how much they spend on staffing, research and fundraising events. It would seem that there is a marked reduction in these costs from 2010-2011 showing that they are continuing to reduce the amount not spent on the animals. 
I understand that you were obviously shocked and upset at what you saw on your trip to Luxor and commend you for speaking up about it but I feel very strongly that anyone who is going to pursue a topic as sensitive as this must make sure they have as many of the relevant facts first.   

http://www.thebrooke.org/about-us/our-financial-reports/annual-reports


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			That sounds absolutely lovely.  However we are not going to get a "proper investigation done".  No police force is going to investigate with all the experience of gathering evidence and weighing up whether the CPS will find it suitable, no lawyers are likely to be employed to do the same in a civil case.  What is most likely to happen is that there will be a minor "investigation" by the charity involved, which, if lucky, will not be a pr exercise, but which will, due to the very fact that it is the charity itself carrying it out, be in conflict of interest.  However since, in my personal opinion, the charity seems to have somewhat distant record keeping processes, if at all, I wonder how that investigation can be properly facilitated, post partum.

Surely there should be in place, as well as basic record keeping of cases available to HQ, a scheduled review of cases dealt with on a frequent basis?

I, for one, am perfectly capable of making up my own mind on evidence publicly available from a variety of sources on which charities to donate to.  I would assume that the average person of sound mind is equally able to do so.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed that case reviews and audits of those reviews should take place on a frequent basis. However, the more reviews, reports and record-keeping, the more administration expense and the less spent on treatment, education, facilities and the like. 

I don't suggest for one minute that good record-keeping and regular reviews are not absolutely essential, but if it becomes too onerous then resources will necessarily be diverted from front-line operations. 

Catch 22...?


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

wizzlewoo said:



			I have stayed as an observer until now but I find it difficult to understand how someone can post about a cause when they have done no apparent further research into. I spent 2 minutes looking at the Brook's website and found their complete annual finance report from the past 5 years showing exactly where the money is going right down to how much they spend on staffing, research and fundraising events. It would seem that there is a marked reduction in these costs from 2010-2011 showing that they are continuing to reduce the amount not spent on the animals. 
I understand that you were obviously shocked and upset at what you saw on your trip to Luxor and commend you for speaking up about it but I feel very strongly that anyone who is going to pursue a topic as sensitive as this must make sure they have as many of the relevant facts first.   

http://www.thebrooke.org/about-us/our-financial-reports/annual-reports

Click to expand...

Thanks for that link .


----------



## fburton (3 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			That sounds absolutely lovely.
		
Click to expand...

It's just common sense.




			However we are not going to get a "proper investigation done".
		
Click to expand...

Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to come to a definite conclusion without knowing the relevant facts.




			No police force is going to investigate with all the experience of gathering evidence and weighing up whether the CPS will find it suitable, no lawyers are likely to be employed to do the same in a civil case.  What is most likely to happen is that there will be a minor "investigation" by the charity involved, which, if lucky, will not be a pr exercise, but which will, due to the very fact that it is the charity itself carrying it out, be in conflict of interest.  However since, *in my personal opinion*, the charity seems to have somewhat distant record keeping processes, if at all, I wonder how that investigation can be properly facilitated, post partum.
		
Click to expand...

Are you referring to their record keeping in general or just this specific case?




			Surely there should be in place, as well as basic record keeping of cases available to HQ, a scheduled review of cases dealt with on a frequent basis?
		
Click to expand...

I would certainly hope so.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

AMH said:



			Agreed that case reviews and audits of those reviews should take place on a frequent basis. However, the more reviews, reports and record-keeping, the more administration expense and the less spent on treatment, education, facilities and the like. 

I don't suggest for one minute that good record-keeping and regular reviews are not absolutely essential, but if it becomes too onerous then resources will necessarily be diverted from front-line operations. 

Catch 22...?
		
Click to expand...

Agree with this the NHS is drowning in record keeping but it's not stopping bad care in some cases.


----------



## rockysmum (3 May 2012)

Having caught up with all 33 pages 

I suspect the real problem here is peoples expectations.  We donate to these charities and expect the care to be of a standard we would expect for our own.  Perhaps not the amount of equipment, drugs etc, but we expect the staff to be doing the job for love not just money.

If that had been my horse I would have expected the vet or at least nurses to monitor it and show some care in whether it lived or died. Perhaps the policy of employing local vets on very low wages isn't a good one.

Brooke have probably not done anything wrong but it is still not we expect when we donate.

Would they put pics of this horses care in their brochures, I doubt it.

Perhaps they need to be more honest about the levels of care they actually provide.  If their policy is not to have equipment such as xrays and therefore only treat the obvious, they should say so.

But I for one would not have donated if I knew that was what the money was going towards.  Perhaps thats why people are upset.

Their calendar on my office wall paints a very different picture


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Why when we don't agree do some people have to descend quickly to being unpleasant "not in My right mind "I just don't agree with you.
As you say what AH's wrote is ambiguous but you need to take care when you move outside of the forum into real life what anyone types on here a member can take up directly, not so once you have pressed send and it's with a third party its a different matter.
		
Click to expand...

Then I would advise that you that don't write anything that you would want repeating. Once in the world wide web, you have no control.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (3 May 2012)

Lark said:



			To believe that a charity is above question and infallible to corruption is plain stupid.  And I am quite happy to have categorised myself as that for years until someone made me 'aware' that 80% of all donations were going to administration fees. Large reputable charities too.
The OP brought awareness to a situation that she experienced - was she wrong to do that?
The culture on this forum is damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If the OP had mentioned that she witnessed this years ago, undoubtedly the immediate reaction would have been outrage that she did not make people 'aware of this.
Awareness brings attention, it makes people think, it can force an investigation, it can right wrongs, it can drive improvement.
In this the OP IMO was correct to document her findings.
And yes I still hold to the fact that a lot of the responses were completely unconstructive, unhelpful, argumentative and served no purpose in terms of the subject matter which was in its essence a case of one animal suffering.

But then this is HHO so I guess this is par for course.
		
Click to expand...

Great post


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			Then I would advise that you that don't write anything that you would want repeating. Once in the world wide web, you have no control.
		
Click to expand...

I did not write anything I would want repeating.
I objected to an other poster emailing the Brooke saying that the members of HHO had reacted with consternation to OP's allegations I had not reacted with consternation and objected to her speaking for the forum and therefore attributing reactions to me (and other members )that I do no not hold.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I did not write anything I would want repeating.
I objected to an other poster emailing the Brooke saying that the members of HHO had reacted with consternation to OP's allegations I had not reacted with consternation and objected to her speaking for the forum and therefore attributing reactions to me (and other members )that I do no not hold.
		
Click to expand...

Then you need to get a life. Seriously.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			Then you need to get a life. Seriously.
		
Click to expand...

Why so rude ?
I was not rude to you.


----------



## AMH (3 May 2012)

And I thought we were actually getting some reasoned debate going...


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Why so rude ?
I was not rude to you.
		
Click to expand...

I apologise. 

But, your objection to being included in an email regarding this post could be construed as arrogant. Was what you previously stated really that important and  enough to cause The Brooke to take note? No, mine neither, so don't sweat it and demand people apologise to you.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			I apologise. 

But, your objection to being included in an email regarding this post could be construed as arrogant. Was what you previously stated really that important and  enough to cause The Brooke to take note? No, mine neither, so don't sweat it and demand people apologise to you.
		
Click to expand...

Why arrogant its not arrogant not to want others to attribute views to you outside the forum that you do not hold . I thought it was good AH's took the trouble to email with their view but honestly I do not hold her / his view.


----------



## ChesnutsRoasting (3 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Why arrogant its not arrogant not to want others to attribute views to you outside the forum that you do not hold . I thought it was good AH's took the trouble to email with their view but honestly I do not hold her / his view.
		
Click to expand...

Like I say, you post something on a forum it can be included in anything, email, blog, other forums etc., hence why I suggested you either have to be 100% in what you post or not be bothered if a stranger uses your posts in their own interests.


----------



## Goldenstar (3 May 2012)

blazingsaddles said:



			Like I say, you post something on a forum it can be included in anything, email, blog, other forums etc., hence why I suggested you either have to be 100% in what you post or not be bothered if a stranger uses your posts in their own interests.

Click to expand...

I was 100per cent with my posts it was being lumped in with those I profoundly disagree with I did not like . If we followed your view to the end you could never post on a thread where you disagreed with the OP.
Thinking about it some might like this.
I should also have said thank you for your apology which I happily accept.


----------



## amandat (3 May 2012)

AMH said:



			No-one on this forum would condone cruelty to animals or the unnecessary prolongation of suffering. And it's very difficult for us to comment without having been there at the time. But I'm afraid the OP opened herself up to question with her post, and must accept that people will want to debate the issues raised.
		
Click to expand...

 are you having a laugh ??   

from what i've been reading there are plenty on here in denial that anything may have been 'amiss' on this particular day, (with a charity that must be good because they donate to it) they really don't care about the state the poor horse was in.  
Whats been going on for the last amount of pages isn't a debate in any meaning of the word !!!


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			:
from what i've been reading there are plenty on here in denial that anything may have been 'amiss' on this particular day, (with a charity that must be good because they donate to it) they really don't care about the state the poor horse was in.
		
Click to expand...

That is absolutely not true. I just don't necessarily believe anything I read on an anonymous internet forum. The OP is saying things that don't match up, and she is refusing to answer very straightforward questions. The Brooke have answered every question put to them so far.

Don't mistake denial for wanting proof, or for the OP to follow through a complaint.

And I for one have never knowingly donated to The Brooke.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			That is absolutely not true. I just don't necessarily believe anything I read on an anonymous internet forum. The OP is saying things that don't match up, and she is refusing to answer very straightforward questions. The Brooke have answered every question put to them so far.

Don't mistake denial for wanting proof, or for the OP to follow through a complaint
		
Click to expand...

You are hardly comparing like with like.  The OP has never claimed to be anything other than a concerned member of the public.  She is not employed as a PR director of a charity, nor a charities investigator, nor, I should think (since she has referred to having to leave for work), someone with endless time on her hands to satisfy a handful of people who do not want their mindset disrupted by conflicting evidence that things may not necessarily be as they want to see it on HHO.  

As far as I see it, the duty rests upon the charity to be seen to be doing the right thing, rather than a concerned member of the public to put endless efforts in ensuring that they are doing so.

The OP seems to have answered all reasonable questions.  The Brooke's answers have been general and placatory, and I find them incomplete and lacking specification.

I wonder why you don't put such searching and increasingly esoteric, questions to the Brooke, rather than to the OP, if you are indeed more concerned about the welfare of equines rather than the preservation of a charity's reputation.

The OP isn't raising millions of pounds in public funding, nor benefitting from charities tax relief, nor subject to the same rules on accountability as a charity after all...


----------



## amandat (4 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			I'm still baffled?!  Flies, in Egypt, around an animal?!  Burst stitches - on a large animal which is coming around from sedation?!  A vet sitting at a desk who commented that the horse should recover?!!  None of those indicate negligence to be honest - the only way anybody would be able to know if there was negligence is to have another qualified vet examine the body and the clinical notes relating to that horse.
		
Click to expand...

OMG i'm 'baffled' that you're 'baffled'  .... the poor horse came round from sedation after having her legs stitched & the vet was sitting at a desk .. SHE burst her stitches & fell off the mat she was on while "A vet sitting at a desk" sat at a desk !!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Goldenstar (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			You are hardly comparing like with like.  The OP has never claimed to be anything other than a concerned member of the public.  She is not employed as a PR director of a charity, nor a charities investigator, nor, I should think (since she has referred to having to leave for work), someone with endless time on her hands to satisfy a handful of people who do not want their mindset disrupted by conflicting evidence that things may not necessarily be as they want to see it on HHO.  

As far as I see it, the duty rests upon the charity to be seen to be doing the right thing, rather than a concerned member of the public to put endless efforts in ensuring that they are doing so.

The OP seems to have answered all reasonable questions.  The Brooke's answers have been general and placatory, and I find them incomplete and lacking specification.

I wonder why you don't put such searching and increasingly esoteric, questions to the Brooke, rather than to the OP, if you are indeed more concerned about the welfare of equines rather than the preservation of a charity's reputation.
		
Click to expand...

I am concerned about the welfare of equines and I have no connection at all to the Brooke I think I went to some fund raisers for them with a friend some years ago .
I am concerned that the valuable work that the Brooke does to easy the life of working horses might be affected by this this charity works on the ground in Afganistan You can't get closer to the coal face than that.
I don't want the Brooke to waste time answering an email from me I could like however to see some evidence from OP about her allegation they are " corrupt to the core ".


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I wonder why you don't put such searching and increasingly esoteric, questions to the Brooke, rather than to the OP, if you are indeed more concerned about the welfare of equines rather than the preservation of a charity's reputation.
		
Click to expand...

I have asked, and received answers from the Brooke, thanks. Simple fact is charities can't continue to help with welfare if people aren't donating money... and the result of this thread is likely to decrease donations to the charity in question. 

It is a sad day when someone can anonymously post such an inflammatory thread yet others are criticised for questioning it. _Anyone_ can say _anything_ on here, and I am under no compulsion to accept it all as truthful.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I am concerned about the welfare of equines and I have no connection at all to the Brooke I think I went to some fund raisers for them with a friend some years ago .
I am concerned that the valuable work that the Brooke does to easy the life of working horses might be affected by this this charity works on the ground in Afganistan You can't get closer to the coal face than that.
I don't want the Brooke to waste time answering an email from me I could like however to see some evidence from OP about her allegation they are " corrupt to the core ".
		
Click to expand...

I would have thought that it would be obvious that the reasonable person would not have endless time at their disposal to send "evidence" by personal message to each and every individual that posts it on HHO, particularly those who seem to request more and more information with each reasonable response that is given.  

As I say, it is not the OP who is running a charity, and it is not she who is subject to the rules governing charities.  

It is perfectly reasonable for a member of the public to question a charity's activites in public, and indeed there are many instances where this has been proven to be life saving for equines, including on HHO in the past.


----------



## Goldenstar (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I would have thought that it would be obvious that the reasonable person would not have endless time at their disposal to send "evidence" by personal message to each and every individual that posts it on HHO, particularly those who seem to request more and more information with each reasonable response that is given.  

As I say, it is not the OP who is running a charity, and it is not she who is subject to the rules governing charities.  

It is perfectly reasonable for a member of the public to question a charity's activites in public, and indeed there are many instances where this has been proven to be life saving for equines, including on HHO in the past.
		
Click to expand...

She made the allegation on a public forum I have no wish for a personal message from OP. OP has not given any response to requests to tell us why the Brooke is corrupt to the core so why she would think we would help expose it I don't know.
I have never said OP had no right to make the post its perfectly reasonable for her to do so but I don't agree with her point of view.


----------



## honetpot (4 May 2012)

Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
 If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see? 
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
 If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child  and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
  We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
 Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=125433&page=1 
and thats on our doorstep


----------



## AMH (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



 are you having a laugh ??   

from what i've been reading there are plenty on here in denial that anything may have been 'amiss' on this particular day, (with a charity that must be good because they donate to it) they really don't care about the state the poor horse was in.  
Whats been going on for the last amount of pages isn't a debate in any meaning of the word !!!
		
Click to expand...

I'd like to make it clear that I have never donated to the Brooke, nor supported them in any way, financially or otherwise.

As others have mentioned, I don't think it's right that someone can accuse a charity(or anyone else for that matter) of corruption without substantiated proof. 

Just as others have chosen not to believe that the charity has investigated the circumstances surrounding this issue, I choose to be sceptical of a report which I feel, given what I've read, lacks credibility. 

I don't doubt that the OP saw what she says she saw, but I'm afraid I do call into question her interpretation of the events - and my feelings are reinforced by her mention of another charity and her attempt to compare and contrast levels of care provided. She's asked us to help her to 'expose' the Brooke, but I'm not sure what for, since this is only once incident, and she still hasn't answered people's questions as to why she feels they are 'corrupt'. 

There is the potential that her allegations could prevent people from donating to the Brooke and that concerns me when I feel the scepticism I do.


----------



## Moomin1 (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			OMG i'm 'baffled' that you're 'baffled'  .... the poor horse came round from sedation after having her legs stitched & the vet was sitting at a desk .. SHE burst her stitches & fell off the mat she was on while "A vet sitting at a desk" sat at a desk !!!!!!!!!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

OMG the vet was SITTING AT A DESK when the horse came around from sedation?!!!  Shocking behaviour!

 Has it ever occured to anybody that the OP may well have not mentioned to the vet that the stitches were burst, or the vet merely did not understand the OP when she alledgedly told him?!  Maybe unlikely, but to take word from a stranger on a forum who none of us know is pretty ridiculous.  I remain objective in this case and would only be convinced if a proper external investigation were to take place and they were found to be negligent in their practices.  I for one, deal with allegations every single day which sound horrendous and cut and dried evidentially - until I make further enquiries - and a very high percentage of those allegations turn out to be false/incorrect/malicious, and extremely exaggerated.  The odd case or two, of course, doesn't, and those cases are dealt with appropriately.  The amount of times I have had people going crazy and calling me all names under the sun because I have not acted the way they wish or believe should act in response to their 'horrendous' allegation which is in fact exaggerated and not that bad at all, is uncountable!  
As a matter of fact, the majority of cases where REAL problems have occurred and very serious cases have resulted, I have found the complainant has actually not made a song and dance about it - and have been very discrete and concise in their complaint.  The ones that shout and holler about it to the whole world are usually the ones who are telling porky pies! 

 I think it's disgusting that this thread could have caused untold damage to a charity which may in fact have acted to the best of their abilities to make that horse comfortable, yet the word of an anonymous stranger may be the undoing of them in the future.


----------



## Hells Bells (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			OMG i'm 'baffled' that you're 'baffled'  .... the poor horse came round from sedation after having her legs stitched & the vet was sitting at a desk .. SHE burst her stitches & fell off the mat she was on while "A vet sitting at a desk" sat at a desk !!!!!!!!!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

Why baffled? It's a fair point IMO. Vet hasn't done anything wrong by sitting at his desk.


----------



## amandat (4 May 2012)

Well IMO if you don't agree with what the OP has stated why not just make your point & then leave it .... the way this thread has gone is a bit odd.   A lady & her husband were on holiday & they happened upon a bit of a gruesome site.   Some posts on here have been horrible, i don't want to see the pics that were taken but others were demanding them to be PM'd to them - others are demanding the OP answers their questions ... WHY ????   IMO it's the charity that needs to be answering questions.   They have not mentioned why the horse wasn't being monitored or why the vet would lie to people that had allowed access to the hospital, i.e visitors were allowed in to view & told a very poorly horse would be fine.   Do they believe people can just be fobbed off & there will be no come back to them.   

Surely a charity has to be accountable for what they are doing with the money donated to them, if something is wrong on one day they need to rectify the problem & show that to their donators or it will be their own fault they are losing out.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			IMO it's the charity that needs to be answering questions.  
.
		
Click to expand...

The charity has repeatedly answered questions on this thread, and respond quickly to any emails. If they didn't want to be accountable they could have had this thread deleted very quickly. They have chosen to let it run.

Why do people want to see photos or ask questions? Because we would like to know the truth perhaps?

One persons rantings on the internet does not the truth make.


----------



## Hells Bells (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			Well IMO if you don't agree with what the OP has stated why not just make your point & then leave it .... the way this thread has gone is a bit odd.   A lady & her husband were on holiday & they happened upon a bit of a gruesome site.   Some posts on here have been horrible, i don't want to see the pics that were taken but others were demanding them to be PM'd to them - others are demanding the OP answers their questions ... WHY ????   IMO *it's the charity that needs to be answering questions*.   They have not mentioned why the horse wasn't being monitored or why the vet would lie to people that had allowed access to the hospital, i.e visitors were allowed in to view & told a very poorly horse would be fine.   Do they believe people can just be fobbed off & there will be no come back to them.   

Surely a charity has to be accountable for what they are doing with the money donated to them, if something is wrong on one day they need to rectify the problem & show that to their donators or it will be their own fault they are losing out.
		
Click to expand...

And I think it has to be honest. I apologise if I am wrong.

I don't disagree with you regarding the way some people have spoken to the OP, I think you are completely right in that respect.

As for being accountable, I believe they are very much. This thread has done more than enough damage I would imagine. But I for one will not be stopping my donations...if anything I will increase them.


----------



## Moomin1 (4 May 2012)

amandat said:



			Well IMO if you don't agree with what the OP has stated why not just make your point & then leave it .... the way this thread has gone is a bit odd.   A lady & her husband were on holiday & they happened upon a bit of a gruesome site.   Some posts on here have been horrible, i don't want to see the pics that were taken but others were demanding them to be PM'd to them - others are demanding the OP answers their questions ... WHY ????   IMO it's the charity that needs to be answering questions.   They have not mentioned why the horse wasn't being monitored or why the vet would lie to people that had allowed access to the hospital, i.e visitors were allowed in to view & told a very poorly horse would be fine.   Do they believe people can just be fobbed off & there will be no come back to them.   

Surely a charity has to be accountable for what they are doing with the money donated to them, if something is wrong on one day they need to rectify the problem & show that to their donators or it will be their own fault they are losing out.
		
Click to expand...

You're right - it's the charity that should be answering the questions - not people on a public forum - which is exactly why OP shouldn't have potentially slandered them on HHO with only her 'opinions' and views on what she saw in a moment of time, and asked for everyone to help expose them.

Like I keep saying, why don't people get off their jacksies and bump up a bit of cash to pay for an external investigation?!  Now that would be proactive for animal welfare, rather than sitting on a forum moaning.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			You're right - it's the charity that should be answering the questions - not people on a public forum - which is exactly why OP shouldn't have potentially slandered them on HHO with only her 'opinions' and views on what she saw in a moment of time, and asked for everyone to help expose them.

Like I keep saying, why don't people get off their jacksies and bump up a bit of cash to pay for an external investigation?!  Now that would be proactive for animal welfare, rather than sitting on a forum moaning.
		
Click to expand...

Why shoot the messenger?  Why should a charity not be held accountable for its actions in public, when it is supported by the taxpayer in the form of incredibly generous tax breaks?

I think you mean libel, not slander, and slander cases are brought privately and are relevant only on their own facts once a court weighs up the evidence (and veracity - truth - is a complete defence).

I do donate to equine charities in Egypt.

I think this thread is going round in circles now, and also that its rather odd in places.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

Moomin1 said:



			Has it ever occured to anybody that the OP may well have not mentioned to the vet that the stitches were burst, or the vet merely did not understand the OP when she alledgedly told him?!  Maybe unlikely, but to take word from a stranger on a forum who none of us know is pretty ridiculous.
		
Click to expand...

Well, certainly the responses by the Brooke have done nothing to shed light on it either.


----------



## Dirtymare (4 May 2012)

honetpot said:



			Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
 If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see? 
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
 If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child  and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
  We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
 Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=125433&page=1 
and thats on our doorstep
		
Click to expand...

Very well said.


----------



## Dobiegirl (4 May 2012)

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/645

This is a petition for an ombudsman for charities who havnt addressed complaints.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

The Brooke HAVE addressed the complaint several times now, twice on here and many more in private emails.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Dobiegirl said:



http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/645

This is a petition for an ombudsman for charities who havnt addressed complaints.
		
Click to expand...

Good idea  

However, The Brooke have addressed the complaint on here, and if the OP is not satisfied they have a readily available complaints procedure which I have highlighted a number of times. The OP refuses to make clear whether she is serious in following a complaint through instead of merely making a fuss on anonymous internet forums.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

Short of digging up said horse and testing what can they do? And as we all know that will lead to some kind of zombie horse pandemic, which I for one want no part of. 
This threads getting silly now.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			The Brooke HAVE addressed the complaint several times now, twice on here and many more in private emails.
		
Click to expand...

I don't understand the constant demands for secrecy, for silencing the OP, and now further references to secret, private messges by the charity, when in public all they have said has been very general and of little use.

Particulary when the regulatory regime for charities is all about openness, accountability and clarity.  None of this seems right somehow.

Some people appear to be seriously suggesting that people should be discouraged from speaking out in public against charities, whether or not they may be right, whether or not they might have witnessed one instance that should be dealt with, whether or not the regulatory regime encourges them to do so, just in case the charity might suffer.

So, remind me again why this particular charity was set up?  And how it is funded?


----------



## PolarSkye (4 May 2012)

Originally Posted by honetpot  
Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see? 
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/ind...=125433&page=1 
and thats on our doorstep

I'm afraid this about sums up how I feel about this (and goodness it took me ages to read through all of this nonsense) . . . I am prepared to accept and believe that the OP saw what she saw . . . but I am also realistic enough to understand that these vets work with next to nothing and in a very different culture . . . making that horse comfortable, in a challenging environment, is probably all that was possible . . . and it's likely not an isolated incident either.

Hard choices indeed.  

P


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			Good idea  

However, The Brooke have addressed the complaint on here, and if the OP is not satisfied they have a readily available complaints procedure which I have highlighted a number of times. The OP refuses to make clear whether she is serious in following a complaint through instead of merely making a fuss on anonymous internet forums.
		
Click to expand...

And I have repeatedly pointed out that there is a clear conflict of interest in the body complained about investigating the complaint, and that the regulatory regime encourages openness and accountability by charities, and that the OP is within her every right to do as she has done.  

It would be far worse for equines in the long run if people who see wrongdoing felt they should remain silent than a rich charity losing a few donations (and quite frankly, the charity itself is responsible by its own actions for its own donations).

In many respects, as a member of the public who was on holiday at the time, the OP is powerless.  I think by raising awareness of this issue, she has done all that could be expected of her, and achieved something.  Which is certainly 100% more than any of her detractors have achieved.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

I'm not suggesting they are secret, just that various members have referenced emails between them and the Brooke discussing said incident. One has been posted, others haven't. 

But tbh I'm getting past being bothered now, its just the same questions and answers over and over. 

I'm satisfied by what I've read and the responses from the Brooke, I know what I think and it's certainly no less of the charity. 

But think it has been a good discussion!


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

PolarSkye said:



			Originally Posted by honetpot  
Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see? 
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/ind...=125433&page=1 
and thats on our doorstep

I'm afraid this about sums up how I feel about this (and goodness it took me ages to read through all of this nonsense) . . . I am prepared to accept and believe that the OP saw what she saw . . . but I am also realistic enough to understand that these vets work with next to nothing and in a very different culture . . . making that horse comfortable, in a challenging environment, is probably all that was possible . . . and it's likely not an isolated incident either.

Hard choices indeed.  

P
		
Click to expand...

I believe one of the main points is that millions of pounds in donations is not "next to nothing".  And that providing luxurious air conditioned offices for staff does not sit well with being unable to provide fly free, sterile environments in one of Egypt's main cities.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I don't understand the constant demands for secrecy, for silencing the OP, and now further references to secret, private messges by the charity, when in public all they have said has been very general and of little use.
		
Click to expand...

And I don't understand why someone continues to imply a deliberate attempt at keeping any perceived wrongdoing secret.

The Brooke has answered questions put to it directly on here, and has repeatedly asked if anyone has any questions to contact them. I think it faintly ridiculous they are supposed to be continually reading this thread and trying to work out what is a genuine question and what isn't. Isn't it a waste of their resources to be scanning internet forums?

OP has made herself easily identifiable with what she has posted on this thread, and I have doubts as to the veracity of what has been written.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

A BLEEDING HORSE IN THE DESERT IS GOING TO HAVE FLIES ON IT.

They cannot provide air conditioned stabling as previously stated because they need fresh air flow. Obviously you are aware that air conditioning works best in enclosed areas? Eg offices??

Ridiculous. Getting a bit silly now. Of COURSE it had flies on it. I cant keep my non-bloody horses fly-free in a British summer, with all fly paraphernalia at my disposal. Give them a break.


----------



## Amymay (4 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			A BLEEDING HORSE IN THE DESERT IS GOING TO HAVE FLIES ON IT.

They cannot provide air conditioned stabling as previously stated because they need fresh air flow. Obviously you are aware that air conditioning works best in enclosed areas? Eg offices??

Ridiculous. Getting a bit silly now. Of COURSE it had flies on it. I cant keep my non-bloody horses fly-free in a British summer, with all fly paraphernalia at my disposal. Give them a break.
		
Click to expand...

The only reasons _I_ mentioned flies was that I suppose I had assumed that a wound may have been covered with something like a towel or gauze just to give it some slight protection from the annoyance of flies.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

amymay said:



			The only reasons _I_ mentioned flies was that I suppose I had assumed that a wound may have been covered with something like a towel or gauze just to give it some slight protection from the annoyance of flies.
		
Click to expand...

A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this. Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.

From the petition earlier



			If a complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome of a Charity's own internal complaints procedure their only remaining option is the legal system. With legal aid being cut drastically this is beyond the reach of the majority of people.
		
Click to expand...

So OP would have to follow the charity's complaints policy first. Sounds reasonable


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			And I don't understand why someone continues to imply a deliberate attempt at keeping any perceived wrongdoing secret.
		
Click to expand...

I don't understand how someone can continually fail to understand the concept of conflict of interest.

Nor support the orthodox regulatory regime in favour of charities between open and accountable.




rhino said:



			The Brooke has answered questions put to it directly on here, and has repeatedly asked if anyone has any questions to contact them. I think it faintly ridiculous they are supposed to be continually reading this thread and trying to work out what is a genuine question and what isn't. Isn't it a waste of their resources to be scanning internet forums?
		
Click to expand...

The Brooke's comments have been so general as to be of little relevance.  I for one, would like to have seen more familiarity with the case in question and direct answering of the questions.  I think long enough has passed now for this to have been done.

I tell you what would put me off dontating, if I were a supporter, would be continual vague references to secrecy, secret messages, urgings that people should keep quiet, things should not be said in public, etc..  Sometimes the less said, the better.  And the OP is not the one reliant on donations...



rhino said:



			OP has made herself easily identifiable with what she has posted on this thread, and I have doubts as to the veracity of what has been written.
		
Click to expand...

Really?  You're not just making that bit up?  Because you're doing that thing of giving just a little bit of detail, enough to make those who support your repeated criticisms of the OP fire...

Anyway, I'm using my instinct, including my professional instinct, along with previous similar evidence I've been aware of, which dovetails exactly with the OP's story, and I believe the OP's points are valid.


----------



## Amymay (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think the horse will have come to much harm with a simple cotton covering over the wounds.




			Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.
		
Click to expand...

I know.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			continual vague references to secrecy, secret messages, urgings that people should keep quiet, things should not be said in public,

Really?  You're not just making that bit up?  Because you're doing that thing of giving just a little bit of detail, enough to make those who support your repeated criticisms of the OP fire...

Anyway, I'm using my instinct, including my professional instinct.
		
Click to expand...

Yes really. Forum rules prevent naming posters. 

I'm using instinct too, funny that.

And your imagined 'secrecy' nonsense is getting rather tedious.. We obviously disagree about the morals of posting inflammatory comments on the internet, but discussing morals with lawyers is always entertaining


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this. Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.
		
Click to expand...

I would have thought it pretty obvious that the relevant clinical question would have been whether the horse should have been a candidate for stitching in the first place.  Bearing in mind the nature of the wounds, the paucity of post-operative care available and the lack of suitable sterile recovery facilities.

I believe, although I do not presume to speak for her, that the OP wondered why palliative care or euthanasia were not given.  On the latter point, the Brooke does not appear to have answered whether or not the owner was contacted and whether he/she prevented euthanasia.



rhino said:



			So OP would have to follow the charity's complaints policy first. Sounds reasonable 

Click to expand...

The OP doesn't "have" to do anything.  She is perfectly entitled to speak out in public should she choose to do so.  She does not have to make a report to the Ombudsman if she chooses not to take that course of action.

(its not "from the petition" by the way.  No-one has petitioned anyone).  

You seem to be very prescriptive, and pro-active in telling others what they should be doing.  Do you find this approach works for you, or does it tend to alienate those who simply do not believe you have any authority?


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

There are no 'vague references to secret messages' - merely the acknowledgement that messages have been replied to by the Brooke to private emails. There is no law against this and I certainly dont think it suspicious. 

If people choose not to share private emails with you, it does not make them 'secret messages'


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			On the latter point, the Brooke does not appear to have answered whether or not the owner was contacted and whether he/she prevented euthanasia.

*It has stated its policy on euthanasia in Egypt*



(its not "from the petition" by the way.  No-one has petitioned anyone).
		
Click to expand...

Except the petition which was linked a few post ago 

ETA this one 



Dobiegirl said:



http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/645

This is a petition for an ombudsman for charities who havnt addressed complaints.
		
Click to expand...


And I would rather keep to the topic than answer inane questions about myself. If you are that interested in 'my approach' please feel free to pm me   Or would that be keeping secrets?


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			And I would rather keep to the topic than answer inane questions about myself. If you are that interested in 'my approach' please feel free to pm me   Or would that be keeping secrets? 

Click to expand...

Yes, it would.  I'm not pm-ing anyone, and I haven't recieved any pm's about this thread either (and am therefore not going to hint and provide half information about anything that is not said in public).

What are your thoughts on the clinical issues I mention above and why do you think the Brooke has not addressed these?  (or perhaps it has, who knows if its been done privately).

You are also confused about the purpose of the petition to which you refer, as you appear to think it prescribes action that the OP should take, when in fact it is a petition to create a public office which might be able to deal with the OP's issue, should it be set up at some future date...)


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			What are your thoughts on the clinical issues I mention above and why do you think the Brooke has not addressed these?  (or perhaps it has, who knows if its been done privately).
		
Click to expand...

My thoughts are I'm not a vet and nothing that the Brooke have said regarding their treatment would worry me unduly. It's not necessarily the way I would want my horse treated, but we are not in Egypt.

ETA it's not me who is confused, I thought the petition to set up a Charity Ombudsman was a good idea and noted that in that according to its ethos the individual charity should deal with the complaint first. Much as I've been suggesting all along. Hypothetically, obviously as it is a petition  which we were being asked to sign.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

Mithras your posts are getting more ridiculous. I'm really sorry to say that but that's how I see it. 
So now you are questioning whether the horse hit by a bus should even have been stitched?? Words fail me. 

And what do you think the OP or any other tourist would have thought then, if they hadn't even tried to stitch?

Whatever will you say next? Should the charity have consulted s team of medics, and then stuffed and mounted the horse on a plinth for inspection?


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			Yes really. Forum rules prevent naming posters. 

I'm using instinct too, funny that.

And your imagined 'secrecy' nonsense is getting rather tedious.. We obviously disagree about the morals of posting inflammatory comments on the internet, but discussing morals with lawyers is always entertaining 

Click to expand...

I have to say that I am accustomed to a far more rigorous response than that provided by the Brooke.  It is so general as to be utterly meaningless.  Theres no attention to detail, nothing useful said other than plactory comments.  Its nowhere near approaching an even mildly satisfactory response in my book.


----------



## Rosehip (4 May 2012)

touchstone said:



			Have been thinking about this thread quite a bit, and hope that the Brooke are able to respond accordingly.  

Out of interest though, do the vets out there need an owners permission to euthanise a horse?  I just can't help thinking that if permission is required then the owners might rather the horse take its chances than get put down anyway as it will mean they have to find a replacement?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry if this hass been answered further on - I have only havd time to read to page 7 of 38! 
Anyway, I believe that due to religious beliefs out in Chiro/Luxor/Egypt, euthanasia is not generally an option and owners have to be firmly pursuaded to accept that nothing can be done for their animals. 

Perhaps the vet had done all that he was authorised to do regarding the horse, had sedated it and left it to pass away? 

I will look forward to catching up on the rest of the thread when I get back from my neds.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			Mithras your posts are getting more ridiculous. I'm really sorry to say that but that's how I see it. 
So now you are questioning whether the horse hit by a bus should even have been stitched?? Words fail me. 

And what do you think the OP or any other tourist would have thought then, if they hadn't even tried to stitch?

Whatever will you say next? Should the charity have consulted s team of medics, and then stuffed and mounted the horse on a plinth for inspection?
		
Click to expand...

I would have thought that a horse bleeding heavily from large gaping wounds after being hit by a bus should have been put down at the scene, or if not possible, when the vet attended it in the clinic. 

Since the Brooke have not yet commented specifically on the true extent of the injuries, the reasons why the horse was not euthanised and the chances of survival, it is impossible to say whether or not their staff acted correctly.

Certainly I have dealt with a horse hit by a car (not a bus) which suffered a large gaping wound.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

Rosehip said:



			Sorry if this hass been answered further on - I have only havd time to read to page 7 of 38! 
Anyway, I believe that due to religious beliefs out in Chiro/Luxor/Egypt, euthanasia is not generally an option and owners have to be firmly pursuaded to accept that nothing can be done for their animals.
		
Click to expand...

That may well be the case, but the Brooke hasn't actually provided that answer, have they?

And it also begs the question why the Brooke is not doing more to improve practices when it has been in the locus for so long.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

They. Don't. Put. Them. Down. Over. There. 

Unless the owner was TOTALLY different from his peers, THIS would be the reason. 

Also, as previously stated, the horse did not die from it's visible injuries but from suspected internal injuries. 
So the owner was probably letting it 'take it's chance.' Not unusual, even among farm animals over here. 

The Brooke had to say SUSPECTED internal injuries as no PM was performed. However if a horse in an RTA dies after being hit but not from visible extreme trauma, it is a fairly safe assumption. Ask any vet.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

TheBrooke said:



			Thank you to everyone who has commented on the incident that occurred at the Brookes Luxor clinic. We appreciate your concern for working equines in the developing world and we were very concerned by this report. Please be assured we take these situations very seriously and
an internal investigation has been undertaken. 

Our General Manager in Egypt has now sent over a report and our records show that on Saturday 14th April a grey mare was indeed admitted to the Brooke's clinic in Luxor after a car accident. A thorough clinical examination was carried out which revealed lacerated wounds to the right front leg and right hind leg. 

The mare was sedated, then the wounded area was shaved and cleaned with antiseptic before an anti-tetanus serum was given. The mare was moved to one of the clinics large boxes and anesthetised to help her lie down on a large mattress, so the vet could begin stitching the wounds. The vets assessment concluded that the best way to know if this animal could make a recovery was to allow it the time to do so. 

Unfortunately in this case the mare died on the same day, from suspected internal organ damage as a result of the car accident, and not from fractured bone or external bleeding. Although she was thoroughly examined on arrival, it was impossible for us to know the extent of the damage at an early stage and our priority was to give the horse an opportunity to respond to the initial treatment.
It is truly sad when any animal dies, despite all our efforts, but in this case we feel we did all we could to help this poor horse and we are sure she would not have been suffering in these final hours.

I would like to reassure you all that our vets in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care.  I sincerely hope this statement helps clarify some of your concerns. 

We do respect the fact that other organisations have a different approach to us but our mission is to do what is best for the welfare of the largest number of working equine animals. With over 75 years experience, we aim to help communities to look after their own horses and donkeys and so help prevent disease and injury, visiting animals at home in their villages and treating them in a way that meets good clinical standards in addition to the work of our clinics. 

Please note that we will be unable to comment on any posts raised on this forum until after the weekend. In order for us to respond appropriately, if anybody does have any questions, please do contact us directly via info@thebrooke.org. and we will get in touch with you as soon as possible. Thank you.
		
Click to expand...




TheBrooke said:



			Message from the Chief Executive, Petra Ingram

I would like to begin by thanking those contributors who have shown support to the Brooke over the past weekend. It is a difficult time for any charity when someone makes a complaint on a public forum without seeking an explanation from the charity first. 

Just to recap, last week a complaint was made on this forum, which was subsequently notified to us. It is very sad that this involved a working horse in Luxor which had been involved in a road traffic accident and died while at the Brooke's clinic. Unfortunately this type of accident is not uncommon in a busy city where horses work alongside cars and buses. In Cairo and Delhi they are banned from the town centre, but not in Luxor. 

When this mare was admitted to the Luxor clinic, there were no clinical signs to justify euthanasia  she had walked in on foot and showed no sign of fractures. An examination carried out by the vet showed lacerated wounds on her right front leg and right hind limb as a result of the accident. The vet in charge is extremely experienced and provided pain relief and stitched the wounds. Unfortunately the mare died shortly afterwards, we believe from internal injuries.

The Brooke has a clearly defined animal welfare policy and it is a condition of funding that all our overseas projects comply with these standards. We employ highly trained veterinary staff and regularly review and update clinical practice, implementing lessons learned in daily working. We do not have luxurious clinics or offices, equally we don't invest in X-ray machines as these are expensive and we believe the money can be better used helping more animals. We do whatever is necessary to reach 250,000 equine animals across the country out of an estimated total population of around 1.2 million, and these are some of the difficult decisions that have to be made.

In accordance with our euthanasia policy, we will not put a horse to sleep without the owners permission. As this forum has already highlighted, this is sometimes difficult to get, due to religious beliefs or when there is a hope the animal might recover, an animal vital to providing income to a poor family. Our priority is to relieve pain and to provide the most appropriate treatment according to the situation. We believe the vet concerned followed the most appropriate course of action.

The Brooke takes its responsibilities as the custodian of supporters money for the benefit of working equine animals overseas very seriously and we always investigate complaints. In this case, we only wish there had been more discussion with the vet at the time to ensure a better understanding of our approach. If you would like me to answer any individual questions, please email me, Petra Ingram, at info@thebrooke.org.
		
Click to expand...

Requoting the Brooke posts as for the people who have not read them


----------



## JFTDWS (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			And it also begs the question why the Brooke is not doing more to improve practices when it has been in the locus for so long.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps I misunderstand this comment - are you actually suggesting that a charity commited to providing veterinary care to equines should be diversifying into attempting to alter the prevalent religious beliefs in a region?

I'm not sure there aren't ethical issues with that, before you consider the logistical improbability of success


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

patterdale said:



			They. Don't. Put. Them. Down. Over. There. 

Unless the owner was TOTALLY different from his peers, THIS would be the reason. 

Also, as previously stated, the horse did not die from it's visible injuries but from suspected internal injuries. 
So the owner was probably letting it 'take it's chance.' Not unusual, even among farm animals over here. 

The Brooke had to say SUSPECTED internal injuries as no PM was performed. However if a horse in an RTA dies after being hit but not from visible extreme trauma, it is a fairly safe assumption. Ask any vet.
		
Click to expand...

To be pedantic, we don't know what the owner said or wanted, or whether or not they were present.  The whole thing remains mysterious.

Why on earth are the Brooke not able to encourage euthanasia, after all the time they have spent in the region, in cases such as this?  Or indeed, to administer euthanasia and attribute it to natural causes, as a mercy?

And what kind of vet cannot make an attempt at diagnosing internal injuries from a RTA?

Furthermore, this description does not tally with the OP's description of the injuries.


----------



## Amymay (4 May 2012)

And what kind of vet cannot make an attempt at diagnosing internal injuries from a RTA?
		
Click to expand...

Got to agree with you on this point.


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

JFTD said:



			Perhaps I misunderstand this comment - are you actually suggesting that a charity commited to providing veterinary care to equines should be diversifying into attempting to alter the prevalent religious beliefs in a region?

I'm not sure there aren't ethical issues with that, before you consider the logistical improbability of success 

Click to expand...

No.  Nice attempt at being deliberately inflammatory though.

Although I do think we are getting near the crux of the matter.

Where do you draw the dividing line between caring for people and caring for animals?  Between placating animal's owners and providing mercy?  Its not at all unreasonable to expect a charity such as the Brooke to go some way towards changing mindsets as to humane treatment of animals.  You are talking about one very rigid interpretation of one tent of one religion in that region.  (which is probably to be expected from a "right on" HHOer, but nevertheless...).

At what point does a charity become so emeshed in the local culture that it ceases to bring about improvements?  Obviously the standard of animal care is not so high in Egypt as it is in the UK.  That does not mean the charity has to adopt those standards.

Other charities in the region do more, while remaining sensitive to local customs and beliefs, and there are constant reports concerning the Brooke over this type of allegation.  Being sensitive to local beliefs does not entail adopting them.


----------



## AMH (4 May 2012)

Mithras, I'm afraid I have to start to question your motives here. You have stated somewhere (and I'm not trawling through the back and forth posts to find it but I'm pretty sure I've read it) that you have reasons for not donating to the Brooke. 

So I have to question how disinterested your arguments. Most of those who are expressing concerns about allegations made agains the Brooke have stated that they are not supporters of the Brooke but are merely concerned with the soundness of the basis of the allegations made.

I REALLY object to your comments regarding suppression of information. I have no interest in trying to suppress evidence of mismanagement or neglect on the part of this or any other member of the Brooke's staff. But I fail to see why I should be expected to take the OP's comments as gospel.

I'm not interested whether you have professional experience of this kind of thing or not. I'm entitled to question the validity of the OP's comments without being told I'm involved in a cover-up!


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

One without x-ray vision? Or a crystal ball...? If your vet can see and diagnose the innards of a horse with just his eyes he must be a hell of a chap. 

Suggesting that they go against religious beliefs and destroy the horse anyway is....seriously misguided IMO. 
A culture difference such as this is not one you can simply talk someone out of. 
And if word got out that any charity was going against cultural/religious wishes like this then what do you think would happen? A lot more horses would die by the roadside WITHOUT pain relief as no one would trust the charities. 

Mithras, you remind me of a lawyer. Desperately trying to find someone to blame. 
Personally I think the bus driver needs to take his share....


----------



## JFTDWS (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			No.  Nice attempt at being deliberately inflammatory though.

Although I do think we are getting near the crux of the matter.

Where do you draw the dividing line between caring for people and caring for animals?  Between placating animal's owners and providing mercy?  Its not at all unreasonable to expect a charity such as the Brooke to go some way towards changing mindsets as to humane treatment of animals.  You are talking about one very rigid interpretation of one tent of one religion in that region.  (which is probably to be expected from a "right on" HHOer, but nevertheless...).

At what point does a charity become so emeshed in the local culture that it ceases to bring about improvements?  Obviously the standard of animal care is not so high in Egypt as it is in the UK.  That does not mean the charity has to adopt those standards.

Other charities in the region do more, while remaining sensitive to local customs and beliefs, and there are constant reports concerning the Brooke over this type of allegation.  Being sensitive to local beliefs does not entail adopting them.
		
Click to expand...

Mithras, I'm not attempting to be deliberately inflammatory - I was (and remain) genuinely shocked by your statements.  I don't know quite what you mean to imply by calling me a "right on" HHOer either 

However, I don't think that it is the place of the Brooke, or any other charity of its kind, to actively attempt to interfere in the religious beliefs of another culture.  There is certainly an argument for education on veterinary grounds, allowing the owner to make an informed decision, but ultimately I don't think that it is politically wise, or ethically sound for them to "push" the owners into euthanasia.  I also don't agree that allowing owners to make that decision is the same as the Brooke themselves adopting those beliefs 

FWIW, I think there would be far greater outcry if the Brooke were to clandestinely attempt to euthanise horses, attribute death to natural causes and hoodwink their owners in the manner you suggest.


----------



## Jesstickle (4 May 2012)

This. Thread. Is. Mental.

The conspiracy theories are like an episode of X files. Not one of the good, early episodes. One of the rubbishy later ones where Scully is up the duff and everyone is evil!


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

AMH said:



			Mithras, I'm afraid I have to start to question your motives here. You have stated somewhere (and I'm not trawling through the back and forth posts to find it but I'm pretty sure I've read it) that you have reasons for not donating to the Brooke. 

So I have to question how disinterested your arguments. Most of those who are expressing concerns about allegations made agains the Brooke have stated that they are not supporters of the Brooke but are merely concerned with the soundness of the basis of the allegations made.

I REALLY object to your comments regarding suppression of information. I have no interest in trying to suppress evidence of mismanagement or neglect on the part of this or any other member of the Brooke's staff. But I fail to see why I should be expected to take the OP's comments as gospel.

I'm not interested whether you have professional experience of this kind of thing or not. I'm entitled to question the validity of the OP's comments without being told I'm involved in a cover-up!
		
Click to expand...

Well, then I'm afraid you're letting your imagination run away with you.  I am arguing so strongly because (1) I do contribute to charities (although that is the end of my involvment) in Egypt and without wishing to denigrate the work of the Brooke further, what I have said is reasonably common knowledge (2) intellectually, I have a distaste for stupidity and for victimisation of whistleblowers (3) much of what has been said in support of the latter is wrong in law.

I am not therefore (and I am sorry to disappoint you) siphoning off funds to some secret pseudo-charity project of my own.

The suppression of information (good phrase) refers here to (1) the constant proclamations that the OP has no right to say this sort of thing in public and (2) constant references to more detailed explanations being given by pm to which the majority have no access.


----------



## Natch (4 May 2012)

JFTD said:



			Perhaps I misunderstand this comment - are you actually suggesting that a charity commited to providing veterinary care to equines should be diversifying into attempting to alter the prevalent religious beliefs in a region?

I'm not sure there aren't ethical issues with that, before you consider the logistical improbability of success 

Click to expand...


If I have undertstood this correctly, you are saying that religious beliefs are the reason why a suffering animal is prevented from being euthinased in Egypt.

"We," find unnecessary suffering of animals unacceptable, whether it is in the name of religion or not. On what basis wouldn't it be ethical to campaign for euthinasia of animals who have no hope of recovery? We see horse charities campaigning for all sorts of things, including transport of meat horses on hook not hoof. I strongly hope there is a decent charity who is working with those who believe that boiling dogs alive is acceptable because the stress makes the meat taste better.  I digress.

Religion has a lot to answer for, including attitudes towards homosexuality, women, how to kill and cook meat (and which meat), and abortion. Thank goodness those who campaigned for change in some of those areas didn't think it was too rife with ethical issues to do so.





			I don't think that it is the place of the Brooke, or any other charity of its kind, to actively attempt to interfere in the religious beliefs of another culture. There is certainly an argument for education on veterinary grounds, allowing the owner to make an informed decision, but ultimately I don't think that it is politically wise, or ethically sound for them to "push" the owners into euthanasia. I also don't agree that allowing owners to make that decision is the same as the Brooke themselves adopting those beliefs 

FWIW, I think there would be far greater outcry if the Brooke were to clandestinely attempt to euthanise horses, attribute death to natural causes and hoodwink their owners in the manner you suggest
		
Click to expand...

I don't think the Brooke should turn into the next Christian aid. But I do think that any charity which is operating to improve the welfare of animals in a country where beliefs like this are held, should not blindly accept them. I'm not sure how you define the difference is between "campaigning" and "educating on veterinary grounds" is?

Apologies for wading in with my size 9s where Mithras is clearly able to defend her own words.  just wanted to offer my viewpoint.


----------



## Suziq77 (4 May 2012)

jesstickle said:



			This. Thread. Is. Mental.
		
Click to expand...

Talking of mental will anyone be showing their shoulders this weekend?  Just wondering if it is worth me reading this from the beginning as I have an hour to kill before hometime....


----------



## Jesstickle (4 May 2012)

Suziq77 said:



			Talking of mental will anyone be showing their shoulders this weekend?  Just wondering if it is worth me reading this from the beginning as I have an hour to kill before hometime....
		
Click to expand...

It's actually pretty boring tbh. I would find something else to read. I've been dipping in and out since the beginning to am realatively up to speed. Reading the whole thing would just be dull.


----------



## AMH (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Well, then I'm afraid you're letting your imagination run away with you.  I am arguing so strongly because (1) I do contribute to charities (although that is the end of my involvment) in Egypt and without wishing to denigrate the work of the Brooke further, what I have said is reasonably common knowledge (2) intellectually, I have a distaste for stupidity and for victimisation of whistleblowers (3) much of what has been said in support of the latter is wrong in law.

I am not therefore (and I am sorry to disappoint you) siphoning off funds to some secret pseudo-charity project of my own.

The suppression of information (good phrase) refers here to (1) the constant proclamations that the OP has no right to say this sort of thing in public and (2) constant references to more detailed explanations being given by pm to which the majority have no access.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you  I was rather proud of that phrase.

I have no issue with the OP telling her story and I never have, although I do feel her language was unnecessarily emotive and I've mentioned that before. 

I DO have an issue with the OP alleging the Brooke is 'corrupt to the core', for which I do not believe she had produced any evidence, and for calling for people to help her 'expose' the charity. I believe that phraseology is potentially damaging and I do not understand the basis for it, despite repeated requests for clarification. What 'corruption' are we being asked to 'expose'?


----------



## Jesstickle (4 May 2012)

Naturally said:



			"We," find unnecessary suffering of animals unacceptable, whether it is in the name of religion or not. On what basis wouldn't it be ethical to campaign for euthinasia of animals who have no hope of recovery? We see horse charities campaigning for all sorts of things, including transport of meat horses on hook not hoof. I strongly hope there is a decent charity who is working with those who believe that boiling dogs alive is acceptable because the stress makes the meat taste better.  I digress.
		
Click to expand...

It might not be unethical but if you alienate people then they just won't come back to you. Which of course would be much worse for the animals. I think people working as 'outsiders' in a country have to step very carefully when trying to bring 'our' beliefs to a country which is not 'ours'. Ultimately, if the Brooke are heavy handed they will just lose the support of the owners. 

And as for euthanising a horse and telling the owner it died of natural causes?! Surely that isn't ethical in anyone's eyes?


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

AMH said:



			I DO have an issue with the OP alleging the Brooke is 'corrupt to the core', for which I do not believe she had produced any evidence, and for calling for people to help her 'expose' the charity. I believe that phraseology is potentially damaging and I do not understand the basis for it, despite repeated requests for clarification. What 'corruption' are we being asked to 'expose'?
		
Click to expand...

And bearing in mind this was before OP had contacted the Brooke, therefore couldn't be due to the injured horse this thread is about.


----------



## Suziq77 (4 May 2012)

jesstickle said:



			It's actually pretty boring tbh. I would find something else to read. I've been dipping in and out since the beginning to am realatively up to speed. Reading the whole thing would just be dull.
		
Click to expand...

Ah, OK, thanks *****wanders off to checkout mumsnet in a rubbernecking kind of way******


----------



## Jesstickle (4 May 2012)

Suziq77 said:



			Ah, OK, thanks *****wanders off to checkout mumsnet in a rubbernecking kind of way******
		
Click to expand...

If you find anything good let me know.I'm bored and I want to go home!!


----------



## Penny Less (4 May 2012)

Well I have read all the posts on here, and my only thought is if all the members who have posted were actually sitting round the same table, would the discussion still have gone the same way?   Just an idle ponder


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

There would have been more angry gesticulating. And I would have walked out in search of food long ago. 
Speaking of mumsnet, those guys round a table I would love to see...


----------



## Suziq77 (4 May 2012)

jesstickle said:



			If you find anything good let me know.I'm bored and I want to go home!!
		
Click to expand...

Not doing that well tbh, trying not to puke at all the DH references, being amazed at the banality of some of the questions e.g. what shall i cook tonight? which to be fair is pretty similar to a lot of the things on here just i am interested in horses and couldn't care less about cooking, so "which knee boots shall I buy" actually interests me (westropp all the way) whereas "what to make from onions, tomtatoes and potatoes" doesn't.

This is my favourite so far http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_be...ow-water-over-a-pigeon-Ive-just-spray-painted


----------



## Jesstickle (4 May 2012)

Suziq77 said:



			This is my favourite so far http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_be...ow-water-over-a-pigeon-Ive-just-spray-painted

Click to expand...

Ooo. i like it. Some of them seem to have a pretty good sense of humour on them. *contemplates creating a false child to go and get some banter*


----------



## CanadianGirl (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Why on earth are the Brooke not able to encourage euthanasia, after all the time they have spent in the region, in cases such as this?  Or indeed, to administer euthanasia and attribute it to natural causes, as a mercy?
		
Click to expand...

Really?  Did a lawyer really say this?  If I didn't believe in euthanasia and my horse was hit by a bus AND they euthed it without my permission, I would think that could be actionable.  (However, I do understand we are talking about Egypt here).


----------



## Suziq77 (4 May 2012)

jesstickle said:



			*contemplates creating a false child to go and get some banter* 

Click to expand...

You can just talk about your little girl Nitty and your special boy Bradley and not mention that they aren't actually human


----------



## Dovorian (4 May 2012)

I have a friend in Luxor at the moment - and he would certainly look into the Brooke, can you email the photos if I give an email address via pm?


----------



## Fellewell (4 May 2012)

Naturally said:



			If I have undertstood this correctly, you are saying that religious beliefs are the reason why a suffering animal is prevented from being euthinased in Egypt.

"We," find unnecessary suffering of animals unacceptable, whether it is in the name of religion or not. On what basis wouldn't it be ethical to campaign for euthinasia of animals who have no hope of recovery? We see horse charities campaigning for all sorts of things, including transport of meat horses on hook not hoof. I strongly hope there is a decent charity who is working with those who believe that boiling dogs alive is acceptable because the stress makes the meat taste better.  I digress.

Religion has a lot to answer for, including attitudes towards homosexuality, women, how to kill and cook meat (and which meat), and abortion. Thank goodness those who campaigned for change in some of those areas didn't think it was too rife with ethical issues to do so.




I don't think the Brooke should turn into the next Christian aid. But I do think that any charity which is operating to improve the welfare of animals in a country where beliefs like this are held, should not blindly accept them. I'm not sure how you define the difference is between "campaigning" and "educating on veterinary grounds" is?

Apologies for wading in with my size 9s where Mithras is clearly able to defend her own words.  just wanted to offer my viewpoint.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent point.
As far as I am aware Islamic law is quite clear concerning the treatment of animals and euthanasia is allowed. Anything else sounds like a money saving exercise to me. 
Check out islamqa.info/en/ref/8814


----------



## Natch (4 May 2012)

jesstickle said:



			It might not be unethical but if you alienate people then they just won't come back to you. Which of course would be much worse for the animals. I think people working as 'outsiders' in a country have to step very carefully when trying to bring 'our' beliefs to a country which is not 'ours'. Ultimately, if the Brooke are heavy handed they will just lose the support of the owners. 

And as for euthanising a horse and telling the owner it died of natural causes?! Surely that isn't ethical in anyone's eyes? 

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, being heavy handed and alienating people hasn't been proposed  I completely agree with you that it would need to be handled sensitively... but I _do _think it is important that some attempt is made to address it, _unless_ it is possible to perhaps keep a horse so strongly sedated or on sufficient painkillers until they die that the horse isn't suffering. Perhaps that is what happened in the original situation here? 

I don't know if that sort of sedation or painkilling is even possible or feasible, I'd have to ask a vet who worked in those conditions.

As for euthanising a horse and telling the owner it died of natural causes, as it wasn't me who wrote it I should leave it to the person who posted to explain their logic and ethics behind it. 

I suspect that it, along with a lot of the points being discussed on this thread, isn't black and white with one clear cut answer.




Fellewell said:



			Excellent point.
As far as I am aware Islamic law is quite clear concerning the treatment of animals and euthanasia is allowed. Anything else sounds like a money saving exercise to me. 
Check out islamqa.info/en/ref/8814
		
Click to expand...

That's interesting, and would change the context of this debate considerably.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Naturally said:



			That's interesting, and would change this debate considerably.
		
Click to expand...

If it were true, it isn't. There is no clear cut law, and although ibn al Uthaymeen is a respected scholar, there are wildly differing opinions.

For example, al-Bahûtî writes in the Hanbalî legal work Kashâf al-Qinâ` (Volume 5 page 495): 

'It is not permissible to kill or slaughter the animal to alleviate its suffering, since it is still alive. Slaughtering it is an act of destruction and we are prohibited from destroying wealth. It is the same as the case for a person who suffers pain on account of a serious illness.'

Many muslims do not agree with euthanasia under any circumstances.

ETA this comes from a good friend of mine who organises educational trips to his mosque, but as he says you will not find a definitive answer on the internet.


----------



## Freddie19 (4 May 2012)

AMH said:



			Mithras, I'm afraid I have to start to question your motives here. You have stated somewhere (and I'm not trawling through the back and forth posts to find it but I'm pretty sure I've read it) that you have reasons for not donating to the Brooke. 

So I have to question how disinterested your arguments. Most of those who are expressing concerns about allegations made agains the Brooke have stated that they are not supporters of the Brooke but are merely concerned with the soundness of the basis of the allegations made.

I REALLY object to your comments regarding suppression of information. I have no interest in trying to suppress evidence of mismanagement or neglect on the part of this or any other member of the Brooke's staff. But I fail to see why I should be expected to take the OP's comments as gospel.

Mithras, I am really beginning to question your motives on this forum, in case you think I am a newcomer, I changed my name not long ago, but have been a member of this forum since 2004, you really worry me, you have continued to post on this thread, although on several occasions you have said you worry about the direction it has taken......A: the Brooke has answered all my emails within 24 hours, B: they have come on this thread, C: could you tell me why you are so against them, D: do not say you are not, because you have continually made comments regarding their and supporters answers to the queries, grow up and get real, if you want to start a war, start it, as I have said before early on, against the stupid stupid regulations and lack of control about abused horses in our so called humane country....look around you, and let me add, it is not just horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, dogs, cats, rabbits, parrots are all suffering due to our credit crunch....I feel sorry for horses in Egypt as I have already said (read my post), but we have much much more to do here. Yes I have given money to Brooke, and if I win the lottery tonight I will donate to them again, but at the moment, if I can help with fields, stables and cash then it goes to my local animal charity.  What do you do?  If there was an really angry icon on here I would use it. 

I
		
Click to expand...


----------



## PolarSkye (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I have to say that I am accustomed to a far more rigorous response than that provided by the Brooke.  It is so general as to be utterly meaningless.  Theres no attention to detail, nothing useful said other than plactory comments.  Its nowhere near approaching an even mildly satisfactory response in my book.
		
Click to expand...

The response from The Brooke will have been penned jointly by their PR machine and the lawyers . . . it will never have been intended to be detailed or specific.  You could view that as placatory or even blatant obfuscation . . . I would view it as displaying sound business sense.  They will need to take the time to conduct a thorough review before they make any public statements about fault, blame, etc.  It's also laughable that The Brooke should be expected to disclose publicly what the owner of the animal in question did or didn't do, say or authorize.  

But what really matters most here?  PR statements or animal welfare?  

P


----------



## Fellewell (4 May 2012)

rhino said:



			If it were true, it isn't. There is no clear cut law, and although ibn al Uthaymeen is a respected scholar, there are wildly differing opinions.

For example, al-Bahûtî writes in the Hanbalî legal work Kashâf al-Qinâ` (Volume 5 page 495): 

'It is not permissible to kill or slaughter the animal to alleviate its suffering, since it is still alive. Slaughtering it is an act of destruction and we are prohibited from destroying wealth. It is the same as the case for a person who suffers pain on account of a serious illness.'

Many muslims do not agree with euthanasia under any circumstances.

ETA this comes from a good friend of mine who organises educational trips to his mosque, but as he says you will not find a definitive answer on the internet.
		
Click to expand...

How would you explain the humane destruction of the dog by ACE in the OP?


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

Fellewell said:



			How would you explain the humane destruction of the dog by ACE in the OP?
		
Click to expand...

Because there _is no law_, it is down to the belief of the owner, and the Brooke and other charities will not euthanise an animal against the owner's wishes. People are assuming that the horse in this case was not put down for religious reasons, but this has not been confirmed.

I was disputing the 'clear law' allowing for euthanasia, it doesn't exist. Out of interest I posed the question to a couple of friends on fb - one, a lawyer in Jordan said that it is very, very unusual to find someone who will agree to pts there, yet another, who is a Police trainer in Pakistan said it is not frowned upon there. 

It is really not clear cut and although I believe it is wrong to prolong the suffering of an animal, in these circumstances, _without any diagnostic tools available_, I don't see how any charity could make the decision to put an animal to sleep. If the other charity had x-rayed or otherwise definitively diagnosed two broken legs on the dog, and the owner had agreed, then euthanasia was entirely the right decision.


----------



## PolarSkye (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I would have thought that a horse bleeding heavily from large gaping wounds after being hit by a bus should have been put down at the scene, or if not possible, when the vet attended it in the clinic. 

Since the Brooke have not yet commented specifically on the true extent of the injuries, the reasons why the horse was not euthanised and the chances of survival, it is impossible to say whether or not their staff acted correctly.

Certainly I have dealt with a horse hit by a car (not a bus) which suffered a large gaping wound.
		
Click to expand...

Are you not listening?  There are not only cultural but societal and religious reasons why euthanasia may not have been an option.  It is entirely possible that the attending vet did what he could and gave the animal enough sedative to ease it into death (which, for what it's worth is precisely what the doctors did for my grandmother - here in the UK).

You cannot impose Western values and behaviours on other cultures.  Animals have a different value in some countries . . . it simply isn't in our gift - no matter how well-intentioned - to be judge and jury for those who life very different lives to ours, including their attitudes to their animals.  

I have no idea whether The Brooke acted properly or improperly.  I have said that I believe the OP saw what she saw.  But I am troubled by the rather public inference (actually it's an outright statement) that The Brooke is corrupt and mismanages its funds . . . without any clear or real evidence to back that up other than the rather distressing sight of a dying horse, covered in flies in a very hot country, and some vehicles with logos on them.  Oh, and a rather typical PR-type statement from The Brooke in response to all the vitriol.  

Get real.

P


----------



## Mithras (4 May 2012)

CanadianGirl said:



			Really?  Did a lawyer really say this?  If I didn't believe in euthanasia and my horse was hit by a bus AND they euthed it without my permission, I would think that could be actionable.  (However, I do understand we are talking about Egypt here).
		
Click to expand...

Yep, you did.  And my reasoning is as follows.  I rank personal moral values higher than religious values.  At a basic level, what is right and wrong.  For example, I hope I would not stand by and watch someone murder another human being, in the name of religion.  Likewise, I would not see an animal suffer in the name of religious dogma.  I believe professionals such as vets have a duty to the animal in such exceptional circumstances, when they are capable of dealing with the consequences afterwards, by means of compensation if necessary.

However, the "normal" procedure by charities in Egypt in this situation is to offer the owner of the animal 100 Lei or so (or at least higher than the value offered for fresh meat by the zoo) and to humanely put the animal out of its suffering. 

Such a procedure is actually quite educational to all involved as well.

Further, if my horse was hit by a bus and I was not there and could not give my consent but it was fatally injured, I damn well hope a competent vet would put it out of its pain and suffering!  And yes, I would certainly expect a competent vet to be able to make a decision without specialised equipment on the scene as to whether my horse was suffering unbearable pain and unlikely to survive serious internal injuries.

I think some people are confusing fundamentalist Islamic interpretation of law with all other versions of Islamic type legal systems.  As far as I am aware, there is no "ban" on humane euthanasia in all Islamic legal systems, and it does occur in Egypt where I believe in such a poor country, the main issue is not always religious dogma but pure finances.  Islamic law in general is characterised by a lack of judicial precedent and is not always administered by legally qualified individuals but by religious clerics, and the interpretation of the prevailing version can vary hugely.  As a general rule though, if adequate compensation is offered in the right manner, it can often smooth the way.

Who was the one who strongly believes I have an ulterior motive?  Was it Freddie19 (if so, I will not reply directly to you until you can be reasonably polite, although you will find that your questions have been answered already by me in previous posts).  I am absolutely excited to find out what this ulterior motive is.  Judging by the sheer imagination displayed by certain sectors of HHO, it is bound to be far more exciting than my humdrum existence normally is.


----------



## AMH (4 May 2012)

Whatever the circumstances in this case, I can't believe anyone could condone lying to an animal's owner and destroying it humanely without their knowledge. That's just plain wrong, and massively patronising the owner of the animal. If you want to act in the best interest of the animal's welfare, be upfront and explain what you want to do and why.


----------



## Patterdale (4 May 2012)

Mithras, from the tone of your posts I really don't think that you understand the concept of cultural differences at all. 

Re read the OP. The horse was not bleeding in the street having been steamrollered by a bus, gasping it's last. It made it into the surgery so must have been able to walk. Without the sophisticated diagnostic tools that WE have, the vet can only treat what he can see (cut legs etc), sedate to make it comfortable and then wait and see. 
As previously suggested, I really think you need to get real. 
Re read the OP. It really is quite 'illuminating' at this stage. 

The horse died sedated and off the street. 
Surely this is a good thing?

If it were my horse, I relied on it for my income to feed my family, and it had managed to walk into the surgery, who knows? Any of us may well have wanted to 'wait and see' too IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. 

If the horse hadn't been sedated and given pain relief I would be concerned. But they did what they could in the circumstances. 

This is NOT Britain and NOT the RVC. 

Get real.


----------



## hairycob (4 May 2012)

We are all assuming that the owner did not want the horse pts because that was the interpretation of Islamic law that he subscribes to it. But be honest - how many times have you read on here about an owners efforts to keep an old/sick horse going & wondered if it was really in the horses best interests, all the time reading posts telling the owner how wonderful they are? In fact, how many times do you think "poor horse - let it go"?
Some people just don't want to give up whatever their culture & maybe that was the case here. Maybe it wasn't. Maybe he didn't care enough. Maybe the charity couldn't contact him before the horse died. Maybe he was panicking about how he would replace it. I have no idea.
What I do know is that if it was my horse I would be pretty angry if a vet was discussing it's treatment & prognosis with anybody without my permission, especially some tourist who had wandered in. 
If I was a charity working in some pretty politically unstable countries I would have to give a lot of thought to the safety of my staff before I made any public statements. Can you imagine what might happen to Brooke staff working in places like Afghanistan if rumours started to circulate that they didn't respect Islamic Law whether true or not? And even if they had full state of the art facilities staffed by the worlds best Vets if owners thought they would pts the horses without their permission they would be sitting there twiddling their thumbs.


----------



## Freddie19 (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			Yep, you did.  And my reasoning is as follows.  I rank personal moral values higher than religious values.  At a basic level, what is right and wrong.  For example, I hope I would not stand by and watch someone murder another human being, in the name of religion.  Likewise, I would not see an animal suffer in the name of religious dogma.  I believe professionals such as vets have a duty to the animal in such exceptional circumstances, when they are capable of dealing with the consequences afterwards, by means of compensation if necessary.

However, the "normal" procedure by charities in Egypt in this situation is to offer the owner of the animal 100 Lei or so (or at least higher than the value offered for fresh meat by the zoo) and to humanely put the animal out of its suffering. 

Such a procedure is actually quite educational to all involved as well.

Further, if my horse was hit by a bus and I was not there and could not give my consent but it was fatally injured, I damn well hope a competent vet would put it out of its pain and suffering!  And yes, I would certainly expect a competent vet to be able to make a decision without specialised equipment on the scene as to whether my horse was suffering unbearable pain and unlikely to survive serious internal injuries.

I think some people are confusing fundamentalist Islamic interpretation of law with all other versions of Islamic type legal systems.  As far as I am aware, there is no "ban" on humane euthanasia in all Islamic legal systems, and it does occur in Egypt where I believe in such a poor country, the main issue is not always religious dogma but pure finances.  Islamic law in general is characterised by a lack of judicial precedent and is not always administered by legally qualified individuals but by religious clerics, and the interpretation of the prevailing version can vary hugely.  As a general rule though, if adequate compensation is offered in the right manner, it can often smooth the way.

Who was the one who strongly believes I have an ulterior motive?  Was it Freddie19 (if so, I will not reply directly to you until you can be reasonably polite, although you will find that your questions have been answered already by me in previous posts).  I am absolutely excited to find out what this ulterior motive is.  Judging by the sheer imagination displayed by certain sectors of HHO, it is bound to be far more exciting than my humdrum existence normally is.
		
Click to expand...

Mithras, I think if you read my posts, at no time have I said that you have an ulterior motive, perhaps that is someone else, also I would like to think that I have been polite....


----------



## stormalong (4 May 2012)

I can tell you that the caleche driver was with the horse when it died.  He was not offered the opportunity to euthanize the horse.  If you read the response from The Brooke, and sorry I can't cut and paste it, but they do state some people are opposed to this, however they do not state it was offered on behalf of this animal.

Yes, over there when offering to PTS they offer them 200LE.  Well they do at the other charity, how much the Brooke offer, if at all, I can't vouch for.

As someone as previously posted, the  charities mission (all of them in Luxor, and I am sure throughout the world) is to educate, and one of those things is to be able to put an animal out of its suffering.  If they do this then the Egyptians do get some money.  If it just dies they get nothing.

The question of whether gauze was over the injuries, there was none at all.  I also did state it was sedated when I first saw it - however when I went back, the sedation had worn off.


----------



## rhino (4 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			He was not offered the opportunity to euthanize the horse.
		
Click to expand...

How do you know this, did the driver tell you?


----------



## AMH (4 May 2012)

Stormalong, please could I ask you to clarify your comment regarding corruption at the Brooke and what you're hoping HHO members can help you to expose?


----------



## Ladydragon (4 May 2012)

Mithras said:



			I believe professionals such as vets have a duty to the animal in such exceptional circumstances, when they are capable of dealing with the consequences afterwards, by means of compensation if necessary.

However, the "normal" procedure by charities in Egypt in this situation is to offer the owner of the animal 100 Lei or so (or at least higher than the value offered for fresh meat by the zoo) and to humanely put the animal out of its suffering.
		
Click to expand...

So...  Charities should be open, accountable and have transparency in their operations - I agree...  But, cultural/religious ideology in the locality should have no relevance and the charity should take the blatant and public position that they will ride roughshod over the owner's wishes regarding euthanasia or use coercive methods such as paying them off with charity funds...

I might be missing the point here but I don't really see that as being a particularly catchy way of obtaining charitable donations or garnering any local except from those individuals for whom a financial boost might be pretty helpful or to assist less moral individuals who'd be able to 'provide' an animal in need of being pts for the pay off...  

It wouldn't go down particularly well in this country if we were to presume vets working for the PDSA could pts animals as they saw fit (emergencies excepted) without owner consultation...



stormalong said:



			I can tell you that the caleche driver was with the horse when it died.  *He was not offered the opportunity to euthanize the horse.*  If you read the response from The Brooke, and sorry I can't cut and paste it, but they do state some people are opposed to this, however they do not state it was offered on behalf of this animal.
		
Click to expand...

No, they did not specify any vet/client conversation...but you were present throughout all discussions between them?


----------



## lannerch (4 May 2012)

Give it a break op it is obvious to most of us that for some reason I suspect known to you only you are trying to cause the Brooke as much damage as you can.
This disguists me as the brooke do do a lot of good without them where would this poor horse be dead at the side of some dusty road no pain killers no sedation just dead!


----------



## stormalong (5 May 2012)

Rhino - yes I spoke to the caleche driver.  As posted previously I had used him the day before, and have known him for a number of years.  I went round to his house also in the evening to offer my condolences.  All the family very upset, his wife in floods of tears.  Of course they were worried how they were going to earn a living with no horse, and therefore no fares.

Nothing The Brooke can do about that, its just a fact of life.  I did actually use him a couple of days later - he borrowed another horse and carriage from a friend.  So at least gave him a bit of money before we returned home.  

Lannerch - ok I'll give in then.  Well on the forum, but not for animal welfare in general.
Will be going out to Luxor again in the future and will visit Brooke and other charities.
Its not expensive to get a flight, so come on join me.  There's nothing quite like seeing how things really are.


----------



## mountainview22 (5 May 2012)

Wow, is this thread in ths top ten yet?

Anyone got any ideas how to get it pulled yet or shall I give you all a case of down right cruelty on a massive level here in the UK and we can all argue and give hho a ***** name furthermore.

This has happened, investigated now were just wasting time. How's about we yes this time arguing to sort out welfare issues here which charities are completely unable to help with and animals are dyeing out In the public eye.

Seriously, there are better things to do than sit here writing 45 pages of roundabout arguments.


----------



## Goldenstar (5 May 2012)

AMH said:



			Stormalong, please could I ask you to clarify your comment regarding corruption at the Brooke and what you're hoping HHO members can help you to expose?
		
Click to expand...

Don't hold your breath .


----------



## rhino (5 May 2012)

mountainview22 said:



			Seriously, there are better things to do than sit here writing 45 pages of roundabout arguments.
		
Click to expand...

Well isn't it great we have free choice? I think this thread _is_ a welfare issue, the malicious allegations in the OP were designed to stop people donating, and if that happens horses _will_ suffer.

No-one is denying there is abuse and neglect in the UK, it has been pointed out repeatedly in the thread 

Agree Goldenstar - the OP has said she's not coming back. Why should she, she's achieved what she set out to do, make lots of noise and achieve _nothing remotely positive_. I stand by my stance on the thread, this wasn't about welfare, this was a deliberate attempt to discredit one charity and promote another. Very, very sad


----------



## Moomin1 (5 May 2012)

stormalong said:



			Rhino - yes I spoke to the caleche driver.  As posted previously I had used him the day before, and have known him for a number of years.  I went round to his house also in the evening to offer my condolences.  All the family very upset, his wife in floods of tears.  Of course they were worried how they were going to earn a living with no horse, and therefore no fares.

Nothing The Brooke can do about that, its just a fact of life.  I did actually use him a couple of days later - he borrowed another horse and carriage from a friend.  So at least gave him a bit of money before we returned home.  

Lannerch - ok I'll give in then.  Well on the forum, but not for animal welfare in general.
Will be going out to Luxor again in the future and will visit Brooke and other charities.
Its not expensive to get a flight, so come on join me.  There's nothing quite like seeing how things really are.
		
Click to expand...

I thought you said the caleche driver had got a new horse called Lucky the day after the accident?!  Also you do appear to be adding more and more information here as we go along - ie the caleche driver was now with the horse when it died, and now you went around to his house afterwards!  What other facts have you ommitted so far?


----------



## mountainview22 (5 May 2012)

Rhino, I agree, this is a welfare issue and freedom of speech is certainly a valid point. 

But surley you agree, Brooke have done their part, now were going around in circles?

Please don't put me in my place because you will win hands down  I for one just think the longer this thread goes on the more irreversible damage is going to be done.


----------



## rhino (5 May 2012)

mountainview22 said:



			Please don't put me in my place because you will win hands down  I for one just think the longer this thread goes on the more irreversible damage is going to be done.
		
Click to expand...

  I agree,  all the argument has done has encouraged more people to read it *sighs*


----------



## guido16 (5 May 2012)

Guido opens cupboard door and peers out......

So, can we put this thread to bed now?


----------



## mountainview22 (5 May 2012)

If it was worth reading with factual evidence from both sides it would be worthwhile, the past ten pages seem to be nothing more than Petty arguments.

Such a shame that a valid point of view can not just be answered in a civilised matter. Both the op and the Brooke haven't given enough info, then they've added and done wrong, it's madness in here. I blambe the bad weather


----------



## stormalong (5 May 2012)

Moomin - the caleche drivers horse called Lucky is the one that died.  He did not have it the day after the accident.  He showed it to me when I returned to Luxor at the beginning of my holiday.

Re the other information re going to his house in the evening to offer my condolences, I really did not think that was relevant in my original posting.  I did not want to give you a blow by blow account of everywhere I went, and what I did whilst in Luxor.  I did see the man a couple of times afterwards.  Heaven knows how he is coping now - he has 6 children to feed. 

I agree alot of petty bickering going on now.  Sorry felt I had to return just once more, re Moomin thinking he had a new horse the next day.  It will be a long time before he can afford a new horse.  They cost in the region of £500 or 5,000LE, some cost more, and some a bit less, if they are very poor.  Weekly wage for a caleche driver is in the region of 
£25-£30 a month, and with tourist industry being so poor at the moment, don't think they are even getting that.

Time to put this to bed now.


----------



## Hells Bells (5 May 2012)

Deleted cos I misread


----------



## AMH (5 May 2012)

Oh well, definitely no answer for me then. Shame.


----------



## Patterdale (6 February 2013)

Ello ello ello.....what's all this then!?


----------



## Suziq77 (6 February 2013)

Naughty Patterdale, naughty naughty naughty


----------



## Goldenstar (6 February 2013)

Corner Patterdale lie down bad bad girl.


----------



## Patterdale (6 February 2013)

Ok I'm going back to my basket!


----------

