|
Post by schwung on Oct 27, 2009 22:18:26 GMT -5
Really? No point in trying? Actually I'd say there is...I think the LAST thing that should be done with this mare is any contraption designed to try and hold her head down. She will flip in two seconds, I guarantee it. And let's see - the last time she did it she bit her lip in two which caused her to lose a huge chunk of her lip. Thankfully, she did not hurt anyone in the process (remember, she often runs backwards before she goes - someone could get caught in the way) and I have heard many, many stories of flippers who killed themselves by smashing their head on the ground or breaking their backs. This is a 1200 lb animal doing a back flip - its actually amazing she wasn't more seriously hurt before with this trick of hers. I would much rather have her humanely euthanized than have her flip over and break her back or have her head cracked open and lie their dying until we can get a vet out to end her suffering. I just can't see why setting her up to flip again to try and cure of the behavior is a wise choice, regardless of the euthanasia issue. No decisions have been made nor even discussed at this point other than the points brought up in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by equinefreedom on Oct 27, 2009 23:01:17 GMT -5
I feel that the people who are working most closely with her will know the correct coarse of action. Hopefully their efforts to save this mare are not in vain, but I also know they will not take the desicion lightly. This is a hard decision and no one will make it easily. My heart goes out to those that do make it... Maybe she could be a happy pasture pet somewhere... But I trust those who have her best interests at heart to make the choice.
|
|
shekaberry
SAFE Volunteer
SAFE Volunteer Coordinator
Posts: 1,521
|
Post by shekaberry on Oct 28, 2009 10:51:31 GMT -5
If Wishes were a young horse with many years left, it might be worth a try. This horse has suffered some abuse in her past and really just needs a soft place to spend her days or to be put to sleep so her demons can rest.
|
|
|
Post by queengwennypoo on Oct 28, 2009 11:11:46 GMT -5
shwung: I said "no point in NOT trying" And it wouldn't be a contraption to hold her head down, the reins would be long enough for her to hold her head at a normal position, but would put a gentle pressure if her head is higher. This can be achieved by rubber doughnuts on the reins, to give a gentle pressure, not a firm pressure. It would be a training aid to teach her when she feels pressure, to give, and the pressure goes away. This is only a bit of advice that I have seen work.
|
|
|
Post by kdunham on Oct 28, 2009 11:22:31 GMT -5
I'm going to have to disagree with you about tying the reins between the horses legs. You want to tie the side reins higher, close to where the riders hands would be seeing how that is the pressure you are trying to get the horse used to. And you ALWAYS start with lateral flexation before asking for vertical. If you notice when people ride horses and they rear the good riders pull the horse to the side with one rein as opposed to pressure on both that encourages them to flip.
And seriously, this horse probably will try to fight any of these set ups. Granted with the one side rein it would be harder for her to flip and she might not there is still the chance. If SAFE dosent want to take the chance of the horse hurting herself again then that's understandable.
|
|
|
Post by cat67 on Oct 28, 2009 13:09:32 GMT -5
I think it is accurate to say that the days of finding long-term, reliable companion homes for horses is behind us (at least for now). I could not agree more. I just don't think it's realistic to hope for companion homes these days, not when rideable, sound horses are free. Most people will choose to own that as a companion. However, I think a horse should be evaluated by at least 2 and preferably 3 different trainers with different methods before the proverbial towel is thrown in. Look at Whiskey - now she's in a happy home, being ridden regularly but how many trainers did that take? And the approaches/styles were all over the map. It's worth trying a couple of very different trainers before the towel is thrown in on any horse. If 3 people in a row say, forget it, dangerous, I'm 100% behind euthanasia.
|
|
|
Post by cardicorgi on Oct 28, 2009 13:10:02 GMT -5
PK, thank you for your concern; the SAFE BOD is discussing the topic.
|
|
|
Post by cardicorgi on Oct 28, 2009 14:53:37 GMT -5
I think it is accurate to say that the days of finding long-term, reliable companion homes for horses is behind us (at least for now). I could not agree more. I just don't think it's realistic to hope for companion homes these days, not when rideable, sound horses are free. Most people will choose to own that as a companion. However, I think a horse should be evaluated by at least 2 and preferably 3 different trainers with different methods before the proverbial towel is thrown in. Look at Whiskey - now she's in a happy home, being ridden regularly but how many trainers did that take? And the approaches/styles were all over the map. It's worth trying a couple of very different trainers before the towel is thrown in on any horse. If 3 people in a row say, forget it, dangerous, I'm 100% behind euthanasia. Sadly, SAFE does not have an bottomless source of money. Sending horses to pro. trainers, no matter what their method, and no matter how receptive a horse is to a particular method or trainer, is a really expensive endeavor, and unfortunately we don't have the financial liberty that a well-heeled private owner has, even when a trainer is willing to give a discount. When Whiskey came, SAFE received a decent amount of donations for her training, so that certainly was a factor (that, and KDunham's willingness to put miles on her!) for her. When you factor in the so-called "problem" horses, or the horses that need a lot of time before they come around, it is a HUGE expense. You all should know that we are discussing all of these factors in depth, and *certainly* not lightly.
|
|
|
Post by kdunham on Oct 28, 2009 17:01:32 GMT -5
I would say that thousands of dollars were lost on Whiskey between her leaving Idaho and coming to me. When you total the cost of her upkeep for almost 2 years and the "training" she got in that time. Its like the whole nickel and dime thing. Its cheaper up front to send a horse to people that will work with it a little for a discount. But over the long run the costs of the discounted training, feed, boarding, etc add up to be much MUCH more than just spending the money for a GREAT trainer, and get the horse trained. Thats what will find them a home. If Whiskey had gone to someone like Jon Engsin or Duane Hebert 2 yrs ago she would have found a home right away.
As for the euthanasia thing. I'm behind whatever SAFE decides to do.
|
|
|
Post by cardicorgi on Oct 28, 2009 17:27:03 GMT -5
K, I agree to some extent.
It still doesn't change the financial facts, unfortunately, especially currently.
Dollars are ALWAYS going to have to be a consideration, and so is the potential *liability*. Not to mention that none of us want to see anyone get hurt.
$$ limitations are sad, but they are reality.
|
|
|
Post by schwung on Oct 29, 2009 18:12:04 GMT -5
Thanks delasl - I think the biggest issue here is that even if someone were to pony up and offer free training, I don't think that we can in good conscience allow someone to ride her, even with full disclosure, knowing she has such a dangerous issue. This last time she flipped I told our trainer to stay off of her, it wasn't worth it if she got hurt. Wishes showed no sense of self-preservation, and was lightening fast when she did it. She had been getting worse under saddle, more and more balking and threatening even if you did not touch her at all on the bit, just in reaction to being asked to more forward. She was very unpredictable.
I know that I personally wouldn't sleep well at night, if someone off this board offered her free training, got on Wishes and she flipped and killed them or seriously hurt them...even if there was full disclosure, and that person signed something knowing full well what they were getting into and thus there wasn't a liability concern. At that point it becomes an issue of what's ethical and moral and not just what would we be liable for, and this just wouldn't sit right with me.
|
|
|
Post by zebradreams07 on Oct 29, 2009 19:12:24 GMT -5
I know the decision is up to the BOD, but in my personal opinion, SAFE's resources are better spent on trainable horses with a good chance of adoption. There are many of these headed to slaughter right now, and it looks like many of SAFE's companion horses are going to be lifers. It's great when people can offer a sanctuary for nonrideable horses to retire at, but from what I know SAFE is more about rehoming, and a lot of the donations and help they receive is for that purpose. I would not be offended if SAFE chose to humanely euthanize any horses that are potentially dangerous under saddle, or permanently lame, in order to help other horses in need. Food for thought the next time this is discussed, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by mymercedes on Oct 29, 2009 19:42:43 GMT -5
I agree with Jaime. The risk of anyone trying to train this mare is so great. I fear that even in a companion only home, someone someday may decide to try to ride the mare, especially if she is docile and predictable on the ground. It is a huge risk.
Having two pasture pets myself, I can vouch for the expense of keeping horses who are permanently lame and unuseable. It costs exactly the same for the up keep of a horse you can't use, and more once you factor in ongoing veterinary costs. I love my pasture pets to death, but even I get frustrated at times that they take up space I could use for an riding horse for my husband and kids to enjoy.
This is a difficult issue, and I know that SAFE will not take it lightly, and I would certainly support whatever decisions are made.
|
|
|
Post by hooti4me on Oct 30, 2009 18:29:50 GMT -5
This is a difficult situation, and I know SAFE will make the best possible decision. I agree with what is being said here.. when do you ethically and financially make that decision when to euth. a horse that isn't safe for riding, and is taking up resources for other horses that are?? That is HARD decision to come to terms with. As far as Wishes and say Honeycutt goes, you tried, and it isn't worth anyone or the horse getting hurt over. I am also 100% behind Euth. if you tried every avenue. I am 100% behind SAFE in whatever decision you make.
|
|
|
Post by hollynanne on Nov 13, 2009 0:12:30 GMT -5
What sucks about Wishes is that she didn't start out that way (as best to my knowledge). I have yet to meet a horse that behaves that way without being screwed up by a human first. I know, at this point in the ballgame, for Wishes, it doesn't matter... it just burns me that Jaime and the BOD has to be put in this situation at all.
Is she angry or scared when she does the running backwards and flipping? Is she pretending to be terrified, or actually terrified (i.e. I had a school horse in college that went dead lame on Saturdays... totally okay by evening feed...)?
I guess I'm having a hard time getting her out of my mind. It just sucks for her. It's not her fault that she's screwed up. Conversely, it's not SAFE's fault either... or the horse that can't come to SAFE, because Wishes has their "spot"... kwim?
It's a sticky situation for all who are personally involved with her. I know you can come to a decision that will be right. And, we'll stand with you on that decision, no matter what it is.
|
|