Tsar Chasm Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 In the big publicised events you are virtually guaranteed 5% of the horses will be put down! The number of fatalities has decreased in the last 15/20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 Animal welfare includes making choices to prevent unecessary suffering and as has been pointed out numerous times it is sadly the kindest option to destroy the horse. Oh your four legged argument! What about dogs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 The number of fatalities has decreased in the last 15/20 years. But the fact still remains! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 Question for you - if the injuries weren't life threatening, but meant that the horse was unraceable, wouldn't you take it home, and have it put down there out of the spotlight? Having the animals put down on course does nothing for the sport or the people who are involved with it. Surely if they're the heartless people you maintain them to be, they'd want it done as quietly and secretly as possible, away from the public eye, without a care about the horse's condition. Chuck it in the horse box (even if it can't stand), get it away from the course, shoot it in a field somewhere. Tell the media that it pulled it's leg a bit and has been retired - provide photos of another similar looking horse in a flowery meadow. Once the hooha's died down, announce that it got pneumonia and died. Insane, no, basically because if it got out there'd be a far worse outcry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsar Chasm Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Oh your four legged argument! What about dogs? Dogs are not supporting half a ton of bodyweight on the other three. You've been given links to support the reasons, if you choose to disregard them that's up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsar Chasm Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 But the fact still remains! Yes and the fact is that the numbers are decreasing which is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 Dogs are not supporting half a ton of bodyweight on the other three. You've been given links to support the reasons, if you choose to disregard them that's up to you. Their weight is relative to the size! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 Yes and the fact is that the numbers are decreasing which is a good thing. And if left to you they wouldn't be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsar Chasm Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Their weight is relative to the size! You'd be funny if you weren't so silly. Any smaller animal will find it easier to adapt to three legs. The facts you have been given show and prove that the horse is incapable of getting by on three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 14, 2012 Author Share Posted April 14, 2012 You'd be funny if you weren't so silly. Any smaller animal will find it easier to adapt to three legs. The facts you have been given show and prove that the horse is incapable of getting by on three. Until it's fixed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.