rescue gone wrong.......
I've written about 4 articles in an attempt to wrap up and update the 3 Rescue’s Saga, and scrapped them all. There is so much involved, with the egos, drama, issues, and lack of resolution, that it seems nearly impossible. I also know that there are those who are already tired of hearing about it. I bet the horses still living(?) at the Rescue are tired of their existence there. I had hoped to report a great outcome with the Authorities involved working together, and getting those poor horses, and the little donkey out of there. I had hoped to report that charges had been filed against the Rescue owner. I had also hoped to win the lottery last night. Alas, none of these things have happened. I understand that there are those who do not want to look at the fact that we can't seem to enforce the regulations in the state of Nebraska on the issues it seems to be suffering with, and help these horses. They don't want to draw the conclusion that if we can't even do this, such a huge undertaking as transport law enforcement will be a failure as well. If, as they say, "no one" wants to remove these horses, because they have no funding, or means to care for them, what will happen when they stop a trailer full of Slaughter bound horses? And yes, I know, there were those who think that this story should not have been written with any mention of the Slaughter issue. How can it not be? When Rescue is offered as the "humane" alternative to Slaughter, and the Humane alternative is increasingly looking a whole lot like long term torture, we need to talk. Does anyone agree that "having 100's of starving horses is much better than 150,000 plus dieing at a torturous hell hole slaughter house"? To me, this Rescue appeared to be a "torturous hell hole" in it's own right. And while we're talking about what we may agree with, can anyone, after reading the article about those poor horses, and seeing what they look like agree that "they don't meet their torturous death here, but you can still sell to a KB and off they go". How can we ever do what's right for the horses if there are people who will look the other way as long as Slaughter is not involved? Then there's the mindset that I wrote the article because of my "dislike" for Rescues". The reasons stated-
1) Rescues "potentially jack up the auction prices of horses". I don't know where this person has been, but the better the auction prices, the better the market. If the Rescues can shore up the market, why would I, or anyone else be upset? I think the poster is confusing our "dislike" with the profiteering by some Rescues that "save" horses at a very low dollar. They then tack on all of those extra charges and then "bail" those horses off to emotionally invested buyers in the name of love. We see that as a bit of a rip off, as they have discouraged these very same people from attending auctions themselves, where they could buy these horses at the very same low price they purchase them for. Reason #2- Rescues provide an ID trail for irresponsible owners "ratting" on them no matter what the "stage of ownership". I admit my confusion on this one. After a horse is sold, or given away, the person in possession of that horse is the owner. I admit, also, that I wasn't aware of this ID trail, and the "ratting" system. Maybe it explains why some of these Rescues aren't able to feed and care for the horses they have, though. Perhaps covering all of those trails, and "ratting" those irresponsible owners out leaves little or no time for care of the horses. Reason #3, and perhaps my favorite- Rescues make "shitty owners" look bad when they can fix, re-home or-the greatest gift, humanely euthanize a problem equine. Perhaps this statement speaks volumes about what the problem is, and has been. If this is the opinion the Rescues maintain about EVERYONE who has to give up a horse, how compassionate are they, really? I'd also like to point out that I don't see the Rescues in question doing a lot of any of the above. There won't be a lot of "fixing" done on a horse that can barely make it through the day due to starvation. Re-homing? I doubt it. While we're on the noble subject of Euthanasia, I want to bring up some comments that were made in reference to my article. I think they're something worth repeating. "Rescue keeps vets busy and well paid. Vets should support Rescue and not slaughter. rescues have vets on their property every other day of the week. One colt is getting ready to have $4000 surgery". "Slaughter doesn't pay vets a freaking dime". I suppose that would explain those vets who support the Anti stand. That "love for the horses" appears to be turning into a pretty penny for them. And Slaughter?-Well, you read it here. There were those reading what I wrote who took offense to it because of the lack of fairness they felt I showed to Rescue. I was told that my title was an attention grabber, and did a "genuine disservice to reputable, good rescues". It was further stated that "there is a lot of good out there, but as always the anti horse folks always want to focus on the negative".-I'd just like to take a second here to ask how constantly referring to us as "anti-horse" has a positive connotation? I did state that there are a lot of good Rescues out there. In this case, however, I wasn't discussing those. But I understand how those people feel. How often do you hear about all of the good we on the Pro horse side do from the "other side"? Exactly. It was asked where the "horse organizations" were in all of this. I guess responsibility is only for private owners and the AQHA. And finally, it was stated that "they're trying to re-open the Slaughter plants instead of trying to help the owner and Rescues that take in the horses they cast off." This seems like as good a place as any to wrap this up. To date, every agency in Holt County Nebraska has been contacted about this Rescue. There were some very good home offers for these horses, some from very good Rescues (see, I DO know about them!) with strong reputations for rehabilitation. Jerry Finch has even been contacted and asked to help. In the case of this particular Rescue, nothing has been done to date. Those rescues offering homes have been turned down, and the Rescue accused of the abuse has refused to do anything other that SELL some of the horses so she can keep the others. There has been no updates. How do we help someone like this? And more important, why should we have to? This whole story is an example of system failure on every single level. The Rescue itself, The Rescues "shuffling" horses into it, the Rescue that chose to support it, the Authorities involved, and sadly, those of us trying to help the horses. We can't ignore that this IS a Slaughter related issue, but that is not my choice. I said it before, and I'll say it now. Given the choice of those horses slowly starving to death, or having U.S. plants open and having them go there, I would choose the plants. This situation has been horrific since September 14, and remains so today. For the horses remaining in that Rescue, Winter is coming, and things aren't looking like they'll change. Perhaps in a few months we'll hear another story on the news about this place. I can guarantee you it won't be a good one. For now, at least on here, I'll move on. But I don't plan to stop watching what is going on in the Rescue world. Those of us who are truly Pro horse need to point out abuse and neglect, no matter where it occurs, and no matter how unfair others may think it is to do so. It's part of the job.
Written By RH2
* note from RM- we have seen some rescues referred to as hoarders by us “anti horse” folks. I found this site posted on a forum and wanted to share it with everyone who hasn’t read it yet. Please people, be aware of who and what you are giving your hard earned money donations to because enabling hoarders with cash and praise simply makes the problem worse. It certainly does not help any horses or the so called rescuer.
http://www.tufts.edu/vet/cfa/hoarding/rescue.htm
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
AQHA Breeder, Sanctuary Saint, Producer of Several Hundred Foals a Year, Rescue Operator Who Really Cares, etc……………
It would seem these titles are being used to describe several different people. They are not. It would seem to refer to the sides of the recent debate raging in the horse industry. It is not.
I was in the horse industry in 1988. It was the back end of the decade of a long blood bath of cheap horses, combined with a crappy economy, I referred to in the Market Opinion Piece which caused so much fervor.
I am trying to make several points today. The horse problems now are in no way a new thing. Ranchers, trainers, and breeders are not the only ones getting paid for producing too many horses, while other horses have a problem finding homes. This phenomenon didn’t just occur in the last 5 years. The animal rights community has been talking in crossed points for many years. Maybe we’ll turn up another idea or so on the way.
This is an article originally printed in the New York Times about the “other” Wild Horse Sanctuary in South Dakota in 1988. I didn’t write it. I am only guilty of copy and paste.
Born free, then captured by lasso and caged in pens, some 150 wild horses have been released to gallop along the rocky ridges and steep canyons of the Black Hills, safe from the rope and the rifle.
This wild horse sanctuary, an 8,300-acre range at Hell's Canyon about 10 miles southwest of here, was dedicated today as the first such preserve sponsored by the Bureau of Land Management. The horses, some held in pens, for years, had been passed over in the Federal program for adopting horses, chiefly because they were too old to be tamed.
''This is essentially an old-age home for wild horses,'' said Donald H. Heinze, wild horse specialist for the Bureau. ''They can roam freely here and live out the rest of their lives.''
In a scene that could have been taken from a drawing in a history book, except for the absence of the Sioux Indian, the horses race along the rugged terrain of the high plains, rest in the shadow of Ponderosa pine, drink from the waters of the Cheyenne River, and feed on the grassy cover of the upland prairie, amid the deer, elk, sharp tail grouse and wild turkeys.
Boredom in Feed Lots: “'It wasn't fair to condemn these horses to a life of boredom in feed lots,'' said Dayton O. Hyde, who runs the entire range.
More than 300 South Dakotans turned out for today's opening ceremony, which featured appearances by Robert Burford, head of the Land Bureau, and Gov. George Mickelson.
The motley, mixed-breed horses, with shaggy manes and untrimmed tails, strike poses that are ruggedly beautiful. These horses will be later referred to as “having the longest and purest of bloodlines” on Cheyenne Canyon websites offering mustang foals for sale. But these wild horses, commonly called mustangs, have not been manicured in the style of a domestic horse. ''These wild horses - they'd rather die than let you groom them,'' said Mr. Hyde, a 62-year-old rancher who is an environmental writer.
Plan to Reduce Surplus: The sanctuary grew out of the Government's plan to reduce what it considers a surplus of wild horses on public land throughout the West. Cattle ranchers contend that wild horses are overgrazing these lands and depleting food for livestock. About 43,000 wild horses roam the West, a figure the Bureau wants to trim by about 12,000 through adoptions and resettlement in sanctuaries.
About 7,000 wild horses are now being held in a feed lot in Bloomfield, Neb., under conditions that animal rights groups have condemned as deplorable. It is some of these horses that the Bureau intends to release on private lands, like the former cattle ranch recently purchased by Mr. Hyde's nonprofit foundation, the Institute of Range and American Mustang. About 400 horses have also been released about 100 miles east of here, on a range called Mustang Meadow, part of the same sanctuary. Mr. Hyde's foundation receives $1 a day per animal from the bureau. Let’s do the math on that. Mr. Hyde is going to receive $1.00 a day for 550 horses for three years. $550.00 x 365 days a year x 3 years = $602,250.00. This breaks down to roughly $72.50 an acre or $24.10 an acre per year or $365.00 per year per animal unit, pretty handsome sum for custom year around care in 1988. He also retained possession of said livestock and their produce. In all other custom grazing/care/feeding arrangements title of the livestock and the income from the sale of their produce remains with original owner.
The population of wild horses grew rapidly after 1971, when Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act, which forbids harming the animals. The law was the culmination of an anti-cruelty drive by Velma Johnston, a Nevada rancher called ''Wild Horse Annie,'' who was outraged by the capture of wild horses by ''Mustangers'' who sold them to slaughterhouses.
Roundups in Early 1970's: Since Government wranglers began rounding up the animals in the early 1970's, more than 80,000 stallions, mares and burros have been adopted and taken to homes throughout the country. The horses cost $125; the burros cost $75. In the near future the Cheyenne Canyon mustang foals will cost much more than that and will compete for the same market niche. To his credit, it seems Mr. Hyde has been much better at marketing than the BLM over the past 21 years.
Humane groups, who charge that the Bureau is unduly influenced by cattle interests, have long called for wild horse sanctuaries. But they have criticized the selection of the South Dakota sites, where they say vicious winter winds will kill scores of horses.
''The blizzards that kill livestock will also kill the horses,'' said Elizabeth Pelletier, executive director of the Wild Horse Alliance, based in northern California. See what I mean about the “crossed points” thing??? Even “back then” they couldn’t figure out which side of the fence to talk from.
Federal subsidies for the Black Hills sanctuary will end in three years, when Mr. Hyde's group takes responsibility for raising funds. The Foundation intends to raise the cash chiefly through tourism; visitors will pay a fee to be driven among the horses to take pictures. Mr. Hyde also plans to build a museum that would chronicle the history and importance of the horse to American and Indian cultures
''Look at that,'' marveled Mr. Hyde, pointing to a horse racing freely across the upland prairie, with the setting sun casting an amber glow across the sandstone ridge in the distance. ''That's what it looked like 300 years ago.''
A version of this article appeared in print on Thursday, October 6, 1988, on section a, page 18, of the New York edition.
He has funded and grown the sanctuary in various ways. I don’t begrudge anyone making a living or making a profit. The movie deals, the tourist dollars, the tax exempt donation, raising and selling APHA and AQHA foals or horses, are not a problem for me.
Here’s my problem with the whole program. Mr. Hyde and Susan Watts state in their promotional websites they obtained their first mustang stallion in 1994 and mention at least three different stallions producing foals for them. This year, 2009, is the last year you will be able to buy a piece of the American west in the form of a mustang foal due to the changing climate of the horse market. The site also has a page for “birth control” programs which I did not read. I didn’t care enough to read it. After hearing for 5 or 6 years about the stupid ******* breeders/ranchers pumping out foals when there is no market, reading about Mr. Hyde and Ms. Watts recently implementing birth control in their mustang herd just didn’t impress me. Unless I am mistaken, the BLM had an ongoing problem of no market for mustangs all during the time Mr. Hyde and Ms. Watts were raising them. (Or all during the 21 years spanning 1988 until 2009.) That’s what the research I read while doing the 41 Mustangs blog would have us believe. Like any other savvy horse business people, Cheyenne Canyon Quarter Horses and Paints/Wild Horse Sanctuary used the boom time of the 90’s to make money on the mustang foals in the same manner as the rest of us “greedy” folks. It would seem the “responsible” approach would have been to “market” the overpopulation of mustangs from the BLM ranges to fill this niche--not breed more.
Crossed points again????
One last time I have no problem with the program, except the continued breeding of the mustangs that needed a sanctuary in the first place. http://wildmustangs.com/horseshelpingkid.html
BY RH1
I happen to share RH's opinion on breeding mustangs or any animal that is in a rescue or is gathered and put into "sanctuaries" due to an over population of them in their natural habitat. I did a quick search on "mustang breeders" and it was mind boggling the number that popped up. Here are just a couple
http://www.pryorhorses.com/pmmba.htm
http://web.dmoz.aol.com/Sports/Equestrian/Breeds/Mustang/Breeders/
http://www.raresteeds.com/Breeds/spanish_mustang.htm
Something that really amazes me is the fact that they continue calling these animals "Mustangs" after generations of captivity! WTH? Mustang means wild horse and horses bred, born, and raised in domestic captivity are no longer wild horses.
RM
I was in the horse industry in 1988. It was the back end of the decade of a long blood bath of cheap horses, combined with a crappy economy, I referred to in the Market Opinion Piece which caused so much fervor.
I am trying to make several points today. The horse problems now are in no way a new thing. Ranchers, trainers, and breeders are not the only ones getting paid for producing too many horses, while other horses have a problem finding homes. This phenomenon didn’t just occur in the last 5 years. The animal rights community has been talking in crossed points for many years. Maybe we’ll turn up another idea or so on the way.
This is an article originally printed in the New York Times about the “other” Wild Horse Sanctuary in South Dakota in 1988. I didn’t write it. I am only guilty of copy and paste.
Born free, then captured by lasso and caged in pens, some 150 wild horses have been released to gallop along the rocky ridges and steep canyons of the Black Hills, safe from the rope and the rifle.
This wild horse sanctuary, an 8,300-acre range at Hell's Canyon about 10 miles southwest of here, was dedicated today as the first such preserve sponsored by the Bureau of Land Management. The horses, some held in pens, for years, had been passed over in the Federal program for adopting horses, chiefly because they were too old to be tamed.
''This is essentially an old-age home for wild horses,'' said Donald H. Heinze, wild horse specialist for the Bureau. ''They can roam freely here and live out the rest of their lives.''
In a scene that could have been taken from a drawing in a history book, except for the absence of the Sioux Indian, the horses race along the rugged terrain of the high plains, rest in the shadow of Ponderosa pine, drink from the waters of the Cheyenne River, and feed on the grassy cover of the upland prairie, amid the deer, elk, sharp tail grouse and wild turkeys.
Boredom in Feed Lots: “'It wasn't fair to condemn these horses to a life of boredom in feed lots,'' said Dayton O. Hyde, who runs the entire range.
More than 300 South Dakotans turned out for today's opening ceremony, which featured appearances by Robert Burford, head of the Land Bureau, and Gov. George Mickelson.
The motley, mixed-breed horses, with shaggy manes and untrimmed tails, strike poses that are ruggedly beautiful. These horses will be later referred to as “having the longest and purest of bloodlines” on Cheyenne Canyon websites offering mustang foals for sale. But these wild horses, commonly called mustangs, have not been manicured in the style of a domestic horse. ''These wild horses - they'd rather die than let you groom them,'' said Mr. Hyde, a 62-year-old rancher who is an environmental writer.
Plan to Reduce Surplus: The sanctuary grew out of the Government's plan to reduce what it considers a surplus of wild horses on public land throughout the West. Cattle ranchers contend that wild horses are overgrazing these lands and depleting food for livestock. About 43,000 wild horses roam the West, a figure the Bureau wants to trim by about 12,000 through adoptions and resettlement in sanctuaries.
About 7,000 wild horses are now being held in a feed lot in Bloomfield, Neb., under conditions that animal rights groups have condemned as deplorable. It is some of these horses that the Bureau intends to release on private lands, like the former cattle ranch recently purchased by Mr. Hyde's nonprofit foundation, the Institute of Range and American Mustang. About 400 horses have also been released about 100 miles east of here, on a range called Mustang Meadow, part of the same sanctuary. Mr. Hyde's foundation receives $1 a day per animal from the bureau. Let’s do the math on that. Mr. Hyde is going to receive $1.00 a day for 550 horses for three years. $550.00 x 365 days a year x 3 years = $602,250.00. This breaks down to roughly $72.50 an acre or $24.10 an acre per year or $365.00 per year per animal unit, pretty handsome sum for custom year around care in 1988. He also retained possession of said livestock and their produce. In all other custom grazing/care/feeding arrangements title of the livestock and the income from the sale of their produce remains with original owner.
The population of wild horses grew rapidly after 1971, when Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act, which forbids harming the animals. The law was the culmination of an anti-cruelty drive by Velma Johnston, a Nevada rancher called ''Wild Horse Annie,'' who was outraged by the capture of wild horses by ''Mustangers'' who sold them to slaughterhouses.
Roundups in Early 1970's: Since Government wranglers began rounding up the animals in the early 1970's, more than 80,000 stallions, mares and burros have been adopted and taken to homes throughout the country. The horses cost $125; the burros cost $75. In the near future the Cheyenne Canyon mustang foals will cost much more than that and will compete for the same market niche. To his credit, it seems Mr. Hyde has been much better at marketing than the BLM over the past 21 years.
Humane groups, who charge that the Bureau is unduly influenced by cattle interests, have long called for wild horse sanctuaries. But they have criticized the selection of the South Dakota sites, where they say vicious winter winds will kill scores of horses.
''The blizzards that kill livestock will also kill the horses,'' said Elizabeth Pelletier, executive director of the Wild Horse Alliance, based in northern California. See what I mean about the “crossed points” thing??? Even “back then” they couldn’t figure out which side of the fence to talk from.
Federal subsidies for the Black Hills sanctuary will end in three years, when Mr. Hyde's group takes responsibility for raising funds. The Foundation intends to raise the cash chiefly through tourism; visitors will pay a fee to be driven among the horses to take pictures. Mr. Hyde also plans to build a museum that would chronicle the history and importance of the horse to American and Indian cultures
''Look at that,'' marveled Mr. Hyde, pointing to a horse racing freely across the upland prairie, with the setting sun casting an amber glow across the sandstone ridge in the distance. ''That's what it looked like 300 years ago.''
A version of this article appeared in print on Thursday, October 6, 1988, on section a, page 18, of the New York edition.
He has funded and grown the sanctuary in various ways. I don’t begrudge anyone making a living or making a profit. The movie deals, the tourist dollars, the tax exempt donation, raising and selling APHA and AQHA foals or horses, are not a problem for me.
Here’s my problem with the whole program. Mr. Hyde and Susan Watts state in their promotional websites they obtained their first mustang stallion in 1994 and mention at least three different stallions producing foals for them. This year, 2009, is the last year you will be able to buy a piece of the American west in the form of a mustang foal due to the changing climate of the horse market. The site also has a page for “birth control” programs which I did not read. I didn’t care enough to read it. After hearing for 5 or 6 years about the stupid ******* breeders/ranchers pumping out foals when there is no market, reading about Mr. Hyde and Ms. Watts recently implementing birth control in their mustang herd just didn’t impress me. Unless I am mistaken, the BLM had an ongoing problem of no market for mustangs all during the time Mr. Hyde and Ms. Watts were raising them. (Or all during the 21 years spanning 1988 until 2009.) That’s what the research I read while doing the 41 Mustangs blog would have us believe. Like any other savvy horse business people, Cheyenne Canyon Quarter Horses and Paints/Wild Horse Sanctuary used the boom time of the 90’s to make money on the mustang foals in the same manner as the rest of us “greedy” folks. It would seem the “responsible” approach would have been to “market” the overpopulation of mustangs from the BLM ranges to fill this niche--not breed more.
Crossed points again????
One last time I have no problem with the program, except the continued breeding of the mustangs that needed a sanctuary in the first place. http://wildmustangs.com/horseshelpingkid.html
BY RH1
I happen to share RH's opinion on breeding mustangs or any animal that is in a rescue or is gathered and put into "sanctuaries" due to an over population of them in their natural habitat. I did a quick search on "mustang breeders" and it was mind boggling the number that popped up. Here are just a couple
http://www.pryorhorses.com/pmmba.htm
http://web.dmoz.aol.com/Sports/Equestrian/Breeds/Mustang/Breeders/
http://www.raresteeds.com/Breeds/spanish_mustang.htm
Something that really amazes me is the fact that they continue calling these animals "Mustangs" after generations of captivity! WTH? Mustang means wild horse and horses bred, born, and raised in domestic captivity are no longer wild horses.
RM
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Wild Horse Sanctuary……Wild Horse Breeder….. Research Facility…….Tourist Trap…….I Am Confused…..
Mustang preserves, horse sanctuaries, rescues, or anti-slaughter figure heads who own stallions rub my fur wrong. Humanitarians with hands out and pockets open all the while condemning those who try to produce the next generation of good horses at a profit for creating the problem. Those who reserve the right to panhandle for donations should not be allowed to reproduce your problems/horses. If the horses have nowhere else to go and you depend on the taxpayers/philanthropists to support them, for love of all that’s holy, don’t make more of them. Not even in the name of research or love.
Personally, I love geldings. As a matter of fact I am looking into a grant to research the cultural herd dynamic of the altered male domestic horse as we speak. To truly understand these unique special horses and educate people in their care we need to study their habitat and culture. Of course, I will need to lease more pasture and obtain more altered male domestic horses. I have transportation equipment and an operational head quarter, but would accept donations to offset the cost of maintenance and day to day operation. Anyone wishing to sponsor the training of or adopt one of these altered male domestic horses please refer to the Anything For a Buck Rescue blog written some time ago, while the horse described there has been sold (err….adopted) I have others. I know…. it just doesn’t work for me…….go figure……..anyway back to the article in question and my backward rubbed fur.
The following is taken from an article in South Dakota magazine, the May/June issue to be exact. The article is available in its entirety if you wish to purchase the magazine back issue you can do so at http://www.southdakotamagazine.com/ . If not then you’re going to have to make do with what I comment on. You will have to take my word many of the pictures accompanying this article contain 2009 foals. One foal is saved from frostbite in the house after being born in the late spring blizzard this part of the country had the pleasure of enjoying. No, I don’t think the foal should have been left out in the blizzard. I think his mother should never have been allowed to become pregnant in a “sanctuary” in the first place. Hopefully, this winter will be kinder to the northern plains than last.
Karen Sussman has been active with International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros, since 1983 and six years later became the group’s third president. She moved to South Dakota ten years ago, hoping to find a home for the wild horses being removed from the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. She kept the horses in the badlands of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation for two years before buying a patch of grass on the Cheyenne Indian Reservation northwest of Pierre.
Not entirely sure how that works. I was not aware it was possible to “buy” reservation land but that’s what it says so that’s how I will tell it.
She now has 350 horses on 680 acres.
We have to hope she is practicing good horse management or keeping her horses in the same manner as any breeding, training, or boarding establishment which must maintain a large population of horses on a small amount of land. If not she is heading down the Three Strikes path to decimate more than a section of range land grasses. It is the opinion of a local couple, good friends of mine who do know horses, this sanctuary may be sliding down the slippery slope of “hoarder” with a cause.
One of my main pet peeves in the mustang/anti-slaughter debate is the almost total misunderstanding, underestimating, or just don’t give a damn about how much land, funding, and logistics will be needed to work this horse thing out.
Ms. Sussman’s stocking rate on her 680 is 1.95 acres per horse. That’s way over grazing even the best pasture I’ve been lucky enough to rent. The land needed to carry a horse in the Lantry, South Dakota area is closer to five times that I would guess. The stocking rate at Three Strikes which starved 300 head of horses last winter at Alliance, Nebraska was 6.33 acres per horse. Is anyone doing the math here???
There are many areas of public land where the number of acres needed to support a horse is over 100. I am referring to the free roaming horses who are supposed to be self supporting in their natural habitat. I fail to see the difference between 350 horses on 680 acres at a “sanctuary” and any other form of captive confinement by the BLM. The website I visited while researching the numbers for the 41 Mustangs commentary was adamantly against capturing BLM horses to keep them confined.
She hopes to add more land and she wants to find homes for some horses. Last year she placed 200 horses, including 30 to tribal schools.
Just reroute your donations (Journal staff Sunday, October 14, 2007)
there was a hay drive in place to feed some of the horses she adopted out. I have nothing against the Tribal School or natural horsemanship but it would streamline the donation process if the BLM had given the horses directly to the school without Ms. Sussman having to raise them first.
Her main goal is to preserve the bloodlines and culture, and to research behaviors. “A horse population has an education system comparable to Harvard”, “Every herd has its own culture, developed from living together over eons of time if they haven’t been gathered, removed, and disrupted”, Sussman is quoted as saying.
These horses have been disrupted and gathered. These horses have been removed and confined. They are in a “sanctuary”. Their sheer numbers on the land where they reside ensures they will need to be maintained as any other horse population. Something tells me that the culture she is studying/preserving in these mustangs will be strikingly similar to the “culture of an AQHA ranch stallion with his band of mares running on the same 680 acres.
The ISPMB believes the BLM doesn’t understand horses from a behavioral standpoint. I’ll let Ms. Sussman take it from here for now.
“They (the BL M) often destroy the band structure by separating the stallions. Then the younger studs take over and all of a sudden chaos can take over. The bachelor stallions will chase the mares, attack them and rape them.
I don’t know much about mustangs, but any young stallion who tries to “rape” any “domestic” range mare I ever met will be one sorry little teenager.
It’s the harem stallions who create order and respect among a band of horses, and no on challenges him until he is too old or too sick to perform his role.
When a harem stallion is in control fillies are not bred until they are four years old. The mares are respected and the bachelor stallions are well behaved. When a younger and younger community of stallions are allowed to take over who don’t have the education taught to them over a period of years by the harem stallions it’s like having a school run not by professors but by seventh graders. Fertility rates could jump from 10 to 12 percent to over 30 percent.”
“The other day I watched a filly from one band in the herd” she continues, “she was in heat and the bachelors were all around her but she was just a year old so the harem stallion should have protected her, but he wasn’t paying any attention so another stallion chased her down the hill to the water where, a second harem stallion chased her right back over to her own harem. I was amazed to see two harem stallions tell her to go back to her own harem.”
Anyone keeping a tally on how many studs she has residing in the same pasture with this yearling filly? Catch colt anyone? And please refer back to the previous comment about gathering, disrupting, and so on. I would like to see the captive fertility rate on relocated BLM horses at 0 but that’s just me.
She and a National Geographic photographer watched as a young bachelor stallion teased his harem stallion. She says in the article “We saw him sneak in behind the harem with his head down. You could tell he was sneaking. Then he went after the harem stallion from the rear, bit him and raced off. It was interesting to see how well they can plot their actions.”
Again, I am not a mustang expert by any means but we have all heard of herd dynamics in training the domestic horse. I believe this game playing has made Parelli and many other “natural” horsemen very wealthy. I don’t think this behavior is entirely unique to mustangs or bachelor stallions. I have seen one of my two year old altered male domestic horses do it from time to time with the boss altered male domestic horse in charge in the pen. Its common horse knowledge, the higher you are in the pecking order, the better life is so many young horses will test the water on occasion. I was not accompanied by a National Geographic photographer so it all went undocumented. See what I mean about needing that grant????
She keeps track of all the genetic records of every horse that arrives on the ranch with the assistance of Dr. Gus Cothran, a Texas A & M equine geneticist. “We determine their DNA and their blood type to establish their historical background. It also tells us how much diversity is in the herd and the minimum number we need to maintain that genetic diversity. Maybe that’s why sanctuaries keep breeding more mustangs??? Contrary to what one might think wild horses suffer from less inbreeding than their domestic cousins. We think they have more genetic diversity than any breed of domestic horses.”
I may be just a hick horse trader but isn’t lack of genetic type also interpreted as lack of a breed type? Which would make these horses nothing more than feral livestock at least genetically????? Matter of fact I heard a joke the other day about how their genetics had advanced so much they were now being born with shoes……not so funny?? It might be funnier if it weren't true in many places.
And of course all this comes with a price………Sussman invites interested people across the country to sponsor a horse for $150, or a herd for $5,000. She is betting the long term success of the ISPMB on tourism. That’s why she came to South Dakota in the first place. The state of South Dakota believes in tourism and invests in it. She is hoping to become a place where people can come and learn about the horses. Visitors can walk safely among the wild mustangs. A curious mare will sometimes follow a stranger, easing up to nuzzle an outstretched hand.
Again what was that statement about understanding how the horses shouldn’t be disrupted???
I realize the buffalo was brought back from the brink of extinction by the breeding of national park and domestic herds. The buffalo was an indigenous unique species of wildlife in danger of extinction. The mustang???? Not so much. The BLM has a problem of what to do with not only the wild population but the ones they have in captivity.
I don’t dislike mustangs because they are mustangs. I do dislike compounding a problem, the blind leading the blind, and tourist traps. Is this a kinder, gentler, politically correct Buffalo Bill dog and pony show or research????
Personally, I love geldings. As a matter of fact I am looking into a grant to research the cultural herd dynamic of the altered male domestic horse as we speak. To truly understand these unique special horses and educate people in their care we need to study their habitat and culture. Of course, I will need to lease more pasture and obtain more altered male domestic horses. I have transportation equipment and an operational head quarter, but would accept donations to offset the cost of maintenance and day to day operation. Anyone wishing to sponsor the training of or adopt one of these altered male domestic horses please refer to the Anything For a Buck Rescue blog written some time ago, while the horse described there has been sold (err….adopted) I have others. I know…. it just doesn’t work for me…….go figure……..anyway back to the article in question and my backward rubbed fur.
The following is taken from an article in South Dakota magazine, the May/June issue to be exact. The article is available in its entirety if you wish to purchase the magazine back issue you can do so at http://www.southdakotamagazine.com/ . If not then you’re going to have to make do with what I comment on. You will have to take my word many of the pictures accompanying this article contain 2009 foals. One foal is saved from frostbite in the house after being born in the late spring blizzard this part of the country had the pleasure of enjoying. No, I don’t think the foal should have been left out in the blizzard. I think his mother should never have been allowed to become pregnant in a “sanctuary” in the first place. Hopefully, this winter will be kinder to the northern plains than last.
Karen Sussman has been active with International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros, since 1983 and six years later became the group’s third president. She moved to South Dakota ten years ago, hoping to find a home for the wild horses being removed from the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. She kept the horses in the badlands of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation for two years before buying a patch of grass on the Cheyenne Indian Reservation northwest of Pierre.
Not entirely sure how that works. I was not aware it was possible to “buy” reservation land but that’s what it says so that’s how I will tell it.
She now has 350 horses on 680 acres.
We have to hope she is practicing good horse management or keeping her horses in the same manner as any breeding, training, or boarding establishment which must maintain a large population of horses on a small amount of land. If not she is heading down the Three Strikes path to decimate more than a section of range land grasses. It is the opinion of a local couple, good friends of mine who do know horses, this sanctuary may be sliding down the slippery slope of “hoarder” with a cause.
One of my main pet peeves in the mustang/anti-slaughter debate is the almost total misunderstanding, underestimating, or just don’t give a damn about how much land, funding, and logistics will be needed to work this horse thing out.
Ms. Sussman’s stocking rate on her 680 is 1.95 acres per horse. That’s way over grazing even the best pasture I’ve been lucky enough to rent. The land needed to carry a horse in the Lantry, South Dakota area is closer to five times that I would guess. The stocking rate at Three Strikes which starved 300 head of horses last winter at Alliance, Nebraska was 6.33 acres per horse. Is anyone doing the math here???
There are many areas of public land where the number of acres needed to support a horse is over 100. I am referring to the free roaming horses who are supposed to be self supporting in their natural habitat. I fail to see the difference between 350 horses on 680 acres at a “sanctuary” and any other form of captive confinement by the BLM. The website I visited while researching the numbers for the 41 Mustangs commentary was adamantly against capturing BLM horses to keep them confined.
She hopes to add more land and she wants to find homes for some horses. Last year she placed 200 horses, including 30 to tribal schools.
Just reroute your donations (Journal staff Sunday, October 14, 2007)
there was a hay drive in place to feed some of the horses she adopted out. I have nothing against the Tribal School or natural horsemanship but it would streamline the donation process if the BLM had given the horses directly to the school without Ms. Sussman having to raise them first.
Her main goal is to preserve the bloodlines and culture, and to research behaviors. “A horse population has an education system comparable to Harvard”, “Every herd has its own culture, developed from living together over eons of time if they haven’t been gathered, removed, and disrupted”, Sussman is quoted as saying.
These horses have been disrupted and gathered. These horses have been removed and confined. They are in a “sanctuary”. Their sheer numbers on the land where they reside ensures they will need to be maintained as any other horse population. Something tells me that the culture she is studying/preserving in these mustangs will be strikingly similar to the “culture of an AQHA ranch stallion with his band of mares running on the same 680 acres.
The ISPMB believes the BLM doesn’t understand horses from a behavioral standpoint. I’ll let Ms. Sussman take it from here for now.
“They (the BL M) often destroy the band structure by separating the stallions. Then the younger studs take over and all of a sudden chaos can take over. The bachelor stallions will chase the mares, attack them and rape them.
I don’t know much about mustangs, but any young stallion who tries to “rape” any “domestic” range mare I ever met will be one sorry little teenager.
It’s the harem stallions who create order and respect among a band of horses, and no on challenges him until he is too old or too sick to perform his role.
When a harem stallion is in control fillies are not bred until they are four years old. The mares are respected and the bachelor stallions are well behaved. When a younger and younger community of stallions are allowed to take over who don’t have the education taught to them over a period of years by the harem stallions it’s like having a school run not by professors but by seventh graders. Fertility rates could jump from 10 to 12 percent to over 30 percent.”
“The other day I watched a filly from one band in the herd” she continues, “she was in heat and the bachelors were all around her but she was just a year old so the harem stallion should have protected her, but he wasn’t paying any attention so another stallion chased her down the hill to the water where, a second harem stallion chased her right back over to her own harem. I was amazed to see two harem stallions tell her to go back to her own harem.”
Anyone keeping a tally on how many studs she has residing in the same pasture with this yearling filly? Catch colt anyone? And please refer back to the previous comment about gathering, disrupting, and so on. I would like to see the captive fertility rate on relocated BLM horses at 0 but that’s just me.
She and a National Geographic photographer watched as a young bachelor stallion teased his harem stallion. She says in the article “We saw him sneak in behind the harem with his head down. You could tell he was sneaking. Then he went after the harem stallion from the rear, bit him and raced off. It was interesting to see how well they can plot their actions.”
Again, I am not a mustang expert by any means but we have all heard of herd dynamics in training the domestic horse. I believe this game playing has made Parelli and many other “natural” horsemen very wealthy. I don’t think this behavior is entirely unique to mustangs or bachelor stallions. I have seen one of my two year old altered male domestic horses do it from time to time with the boss altered male domestic horse in charge in the pen. Its common horse knowledge, the higher you are in the pecking order, the better life is so many young horses will test the water on occasion. I was not accompanied by a National Geographic photographer so it all went undocumented. See what I mean about needing that grant????
She keeps track of all the genetic records of every horse that arrives on the ranch with the assistance of Dr. Gus Cothran, a Texas A & M equine geneticist. “We determine their DNA and their blood type to establish their historical background. It also tells us how much diversity is in the herd and the minimum number we need to maintain that genetic diversity. Maybe that’s why sanctuaries keep breeding more mustangs??? Contrary to what one might think wild horses suffer from less inbreeding than their domestic cousins. We think they have more genetic diversity than any breed of domestic horses.”
I may be just a hick horse trader but isn’t lack of genetic type also interpreted as lack of a breed type? Which would make these horses nothing more than feral livestock at least genetically????? Matter of fact I heard a joke the other day about how their genetics had advanced so much they were now being born with shoes……not so funny?? It might be funnier if it weren't true in many places.
And of course all this comes with a price………Sussman invites interested people across the country to sponsor a horse for $150, or a herd for $5,000. She is betting the long term success of the ISPMB on tourism. That’s why she came to South Dakota in the first place. The state of South Dakota believes in tourism and invests in it. She is hoping to become a place where people can come and learn about the horses. Visitors can walk safely among the wild mustangs. A curious mare will sometimes follow a stranger, easing up to nuzzle an outstretched hand.
Again what was that statement about understanding how the horses shouldn’t be disrupted???
I realize the buffalo was brought back from the brink of extinction by the breeding of national park and domestic herds. The buffalo was an indigenous unique species of wildlife in danger of extinction. The mustang???? Not so much. The BLM has a problem of what to do with not only the wild population but the ones they have in captivity.
I don’t dislike mustangs because they are mustangs. I do dislike compounding a problem, the blind leading the blind, and tourist traps. Is this a kinder, gentler, politically correct Buffalo Bill dog and pony show or research????
Written by RH1
c.c. Vicki, John, slaughter…….
c.c. Vicki, John, slaughter…….
pictures provided by RM and the world wide web for educational purposes.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Seems the ONLY People Thrilled With the Passports Are……….
And Here Is Research On Some Common Drugs Marketed In Europe……..
I don’t think the Europeans are as thrilled about this passport business as we have been led to believe…….Don’t comment to me I didn’t write it. Only guilty of copy and paste.
---The media has been having a field day over European Union legislation requiring horse owners to supposedly undertake that they will not eat their horse.
"I hereby declare that I will not eat my horse or pony," the mass circulation tabloid, The Sun, headlined its take on the story.
Describing the new EU rules as barmy, The Sun reported that horse owners must sign a pledge not to eat their pets - or face up to two years in jail.
United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage was quoted as saying: "I'd like to be a fly on the wall when the Queen and Princess Anne are asked to sign a form saying they're not going to eat their horses."
Bloggers and the like have taken up the story with glee, providing yet more grist for the mill for those who delight in the obscure, quirky and sometimes downright bizarre twists and turns found in the growing mountain of EU regulations.
The "pledge" is part of EU regulations around horse identification which come into force in Britain on July 1.
The regulations recognize the fact that horses regularly enter the food chain in continental Europe.
The regulations will require all foals born after July 1, and horses born before June 30 that have not yet been issued with an equine passport, to have a microchip implanted by a veterinary surgeon when their owners apply for a passport.
Compulsory microchipping will aid accurate identification as it provides a permanent link between the horse and its lifetime passport, Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs explains.
The microchips, to be placed in a horse's neck by a veterinarian, will match the passport.
"Horse passports will clearly identify those horses which are not eligible for the food chain if they have been treated with substances which are potentially harmful to humans.
"By strengthening the current passport system we reduce the risk to human health, avoid the withdrawal of key veterinary medicines, and protect the horse meat trade in this country."
Microchipping will also help recover and identify stolen and abandoned horses, as well assist with welfare cases.
The new EU regulation provides for a standardized format to exclude a horse from the food chain if certain medicines are used, or to suspend its slaughter for human consumption for six months if treatment is carried out with another set of listed medications. The passport must accompany an animal to slaughter.
The so-called pledge is actually about opting an animal out of the food chain.
The regulations state: "An equine animal shall be deemed to be intended for slaughter for human consumption, unless it is irreversibly declared as not so intended in Part II of Section IX of the identification document, by the signature of:
a. the keeper or owner on his/her own discretion, or
b. the keeper and the veterinarian responsible, acting in accordance with Article 10(2) of Directive 2001/82/EC."
A horse's passport can therefore be marked accordingly, or at a later date by a vet should medications be used that disqualify the animal from the food chain.
Actually, seeing the Queen and Princess Anne signing isn't so hard to imagine after all.
If you are among the one million people in the country who owns a horse, a pony or even a donkey, you should already know that by the end of June you must have a passport for the animal. If you are one of the many millions who do not, you will probably need to look twice at that opening sentence.
A passport? For a horse? Bizarre as it seems, the Government introduced regulations shortly before Christmas requiring all equines to be in possession of a passport, whether they are traveling or not. It is, effectively, a form of ID.
In the horse world, the issue has been a hot topic for a year or more. Jokes about how to fit the animal into the photo-booth rapidly gave way to anger over the costs and bureaucracy involved. Already, organizations such as the Horse Passport Agency have sprung up offering the required document to owners who will be criminalized if they fail to comply.
There is a fine of up to £5,000 and, for a second offence, one month's imprisonment. Imagine it. You could go to jail because you forgot, or declined, to get the Shetland pony at the bottom of your garden an ID card.
You may well ask why they are needed at all since racehorses and competition horses already require some sort of identity document to travel overseas. The story, unsurprisingly, begins in Brussels, where regulations were introduced 10 years ago to ensure that horses treated with certain drugs do not enter the human food chain.
Since the British do not eat horsemeat, the UK obtained a "derogation" that ran out last year. But instead of demanding another, the Government said it was legally bound to introduce compulsory passports for all equines.
So every owner, whether of the oldest nag in the farthest field or the proudest hunter in the stableyard, will have to sketch their animal, note down its identifying markings and send this information -- known as a "silhouette" -- to an approved agency, which will charge between £20 and £30 for the document.
This may not seem like a lot of money; but, a week or so ago, the Government further decreed that owners should not identify their own horses. Instead, the "silhouette" will have to be completed by a vet, who will probably charge £30 a go.
So a passport could end up costing £50 or more. For someone who owns a riding school, or a donkey sanctuary, and is already finding it hard to make ends meet, this will be a crippling cost.
James Gray, the Tory MP for North Wiltshire and president of the Association of British Riding Schools, said around 200 schools close down every year and he feared the new passport could spell the end for many more.
The Government maintains it has consulted widely and has the support of august bodies, such as the British Horse Society, one of a number of groups empowered to issue the passports. But Mr. Gray says there is outright hostility among ordinary owners and weekend riders represented by the ABRS, the Pony Club, the Donkey Breed Association, the Shetland Pony Association and many others.
The regulations will be enforced by trading standards officers with the power to enter stables and fields to see whether the horse matches the description on the passport. "The thought of a new army of jobsworths stalking the countryside checking the paperwork of horses fills me with dismay," said Mr Gray. "It is a bureaucratic solution to a problem that doesn't even exist."
What possible justification is there for this law that will cost the industry millions of pounds to implement and could send small businesses to the wall?
Alun Michael, the "minister for the horse" at the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs, said it would establish a database "which would be to the advantage of the horse industry in the event of horse diseases becoming a problem in this country". Asked in the Commons to identify what disease he had in mind, he failed to offer an example.
Some in the industry say there are spin-off advantages, such as allowing potential buyers to check whether an animal has been stolen and discovering how many horses and ponies there are in the country. But the principle reason is set out on Defra's own website: "It will satisfy the European Commission that the UK has a viable method of identifying horses that have been treated with medicines that must not be administered to food producing animals."
Since only a few thousand horses are slaughtered in this country and exported to Europe for food, why not limit the requirement to them? Why do a million owners have to go through this rigmarole because other countries have a taste for horsemeat?
Mr. Gray -- who is tabling two Commons motions today opposed to the regulations -- says the Government intends to remove a long-standing prohibition on exporting live horses other than high-value racehorses or stud animals. Combined with the passport, he suspects many more British horses will now be sold abroad for food, which is anathema to a country that is home to one quarter of all the horses in the EU.
There is a wider issue here about how we are governed and the cavalier use of legislation. This measure was brought in by way of a Statutory Instrument and was already law before MPs even had a chance to pass judgment. Moreover, the drafting was found to be seriously defective by a parliamentary monitoring committee, something the Government acknowledged.
In addition, the regulations covered only tame animals and therefore did not include thousands of semi-wild ponies on the West Country moors and in the New Forest for which separate arrangements have been made.
Yet instead of withdrawing them, ministers simply placed the flawed regulations on the Statute Book while promising to replace them with an unflawed version at a later date in order to "avoid confusion".
As Mr Bumble would have said, this law is an ass. And it does not need a passport to be identified as one.
______________
Guess there are some “anti-government separatist loons” in the UK too….Who would have thought?
Here are a few of the “banned” drugs mentioned in the comments following the market opinion piece I seem to remember one so called vet who was adamant about ivermectin not being studied in human consumption horses….guess that wasn’t as factual as we were led to believe…..
Don’t write to tell me this is not all of the drugs…..I realize that. It’s as far as I’ve gotten for several reasons so deal with it.
An Ivermectin containing wormer marketed in the UK as Eraquell http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Eraquell-horse-wormer-Larger-Tube-Treats-700kg-Bodyweight/productinfo/ERAQUELL reads as follows: Withdrawal period Horses may be slaughtered for human consumption only after 30 days from the last treatment.
A moxidectin containing wormer in the UK is marketed as Equest: http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 32 days of treatment.
A product containing moxidectin and praziquantel is marketed in the UK as Equest Promax http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 64 days of treatment.
Fenbendazole , a benzimidazole wormer marketed Panacur, Exodus, and Strongid P containing pyrantel are not allowed in horses to be used for human consumption.
Mebendazole, one of the benzimidazole wormers marketed as Telmin Granules http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Telmin-Granules-horse-wormer/productinfo/TELG/ has this statement (might be where the 180 days is coming from) indications, warnings, etc In accordance with the Horse Passport legislation (Commission Decision 2000/68/EC as implemented in national legislation), a 6 month withdrawal period applies to the use of this product.
Trivia for the day…..to the person who held Chinese racing up for demanding a $40,000 stipend of sorts for an owner to be allowed to race a horse as a model of humane foresight by a country looking after its equine athletes……Not so sure I’d bet the ranch on how much of that is in the interest of humane retirement for horses…….. The 2005 statistics for horses killed in China, 1.7 mil …..and just in case you think I made that up, go to the study outlining unintended consequences on a horse processing ban in the U.S. prepared for http://www.animalwelfarecouncil.org/ May 15, 2006. Do you think Chinese horse slaughter has gone from 1.7 mil to 0 in these past four years? Seriously?
Stop blaming the AQHA for all the wrongs in the world….It is not their responsibility to care for anyone’s horses. This is perhaps my favorite anti-slaughter oxymoron………If you can’t afford to humanely euthanize it you shouldn’t own it/what has the AQHA (or whatever association or person needing blamed at the time) done to care for unwanted horses…….Doesn’t anyone else see the crossed points here???????
Alex Brown has proclaimed we should keep the auction/rescue infrastructure we have only to administer grants payable to same for each horse they “humanely euthanize” or adopt. Am I the only one who finds this plan repulsive on several levels???????
RH1
I don’t think the Europeans are as thrilled about this passport business as we have been led to believe…….Don’t comment to me I didn’t write it. Only guilty of copy and paste.
---The media has been having a field day over European Union legislation requiring horse owners to supposedly undertake that they will not eat their horse.
"I hereby declare that I will not eat my horse or pony," the mass circulation tabloid, The Sun, headlined its take on the story.
Describing the new EU rules as barmy, The Sun reported that horse owners must sign a pledge not to eat their pets - or face up to two years in jail.
United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage was quoted as saying: "I'd like to be a fly on the wall when the Queen and Princess Anne are asked to sign a form saying they're not going to eat their horses."
Bloggers and the like have taken up the story with glee, providing yet more grist for the mill for those who delight in the obscure, quirky and sometimes downright bizarre twists and turns found in the growing mountain of EU regulations.
The "pledge" is part of EU regulations around horse identification which come into force in Britain on July 1.
The regulations recognize the fact that horses regularly enter the food chain in continental Europe.
The regulations will require all foals born after July 1, and horses born before June 30 that have not yet been issued with an equine passport, to have a microchip implanted by a veterinary surgeon when their owners apply for a passport.
Compulsory microchipping will aid accurate identification as it provides a permanent link between the horse and its lifetime passport, Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs explains.
The microchips, to be placed in a horse's neck by a veterinarian, will match the passport.
"Horse passports will clearly identify those horses which are not eligible for the food chain if they have been treated with substances which are potentially harmful to humans.
"By strengthening the current passport system we reduce the risk to human health, avoid the withdrawal of key veterinary medicines, and protect the horse meat trade in this country."
Microchipping will also help recover and identify stolen and abandoned horses, as well assist with welfare cases.
The new EU regulation provides for a standardized format to exclude a horse from the food chain if certain medicines are used, or to suspend its slaughter for human consumption for six months if treatment is carried out with another set of listed medications. The passport must accompany an animal to slaughter.
The so-called pledge is actually about opting an animal out of the food chain.
The regulations state: "An equine animal shall be deemed to be intended for slaughter for human consumption, unless it is irreversibly declared as not so intended in Part II of Section IX of the identification document, by the signature of:
a. the keeper or owner on his/her own discretion, or
b. the keeper and the veterinarian responsible, acting in accordance with Article 10(2) of Directive 2001/82/EC."
A horse's passport can therefore be marked accordingly, or at a later date by a vet should medications be used that disqualify the animal from the food chain.
Actually, seeing the Queen and Princess Anne signing isn't so hard to imagine after all.
If you are among the one million people in the country who owns a horse, a pony or even a donkey, you should already know that by the end of June you must have a passport for the animal. If you are one of the many millions who do not, you will probably need to look twice at that opening sentence.
A passport? For a horse? Bizarre as it seems, the Government introduced regulations shortly before Christmas requiring all equines to be in possession of a passport, whether they are traveling or not. It is, effectively, a form of ID.
In the horse world, the issue has been a hot topic for a year or more. Jokes about how to fit the animal into the photo-booth rapidly gave way to anger over the costs and bureaucracy involved. Already, organizations such as the Horse Passport Agency have sprung up offering the required document to owners who will be criminalized if they fail to comply.
There is a fine of up to £5,000 and, for a second offence, one month's imprisonment. Imagine it. You could go to jail because you forgot, or declined, to get the Shetland pony at the bottom of your garden an ID card.
You may well ask why they are needed at all since racehorses and competition horses already require some sort of identity document to travel overseas. The story, unsurprisingly, begins in Brussels, where regulations were introduced 10 years ago to ensure that horses treated with certain drugs do not enter the human food chain.
Since the British do not eat horsemeat, the UK obtained a "derogation" that ran out last year. But instead of demanding another, the Government said it was legally bound to introduce compulsory passports for all equines.
So every owner, whether of the oldest nag in the farthest field or the proudest hunter in the stableyard, will have to sketch their animal, note down its identifying markings and send this information -- known as a "silhouette" -- to an approved agency, which will charge between £20 and £30 for the document.
This may not seem like a lot of money; but, a week or so ago, the Government further decreed that owners should not identify their own horses. Instead, the "silhouette" will have to be completed by a vet, who will probably charge £30 a go.
So a passport could end up costing £50 or more. For someone who owns a riding school, or a donkey sanctuary, and is already finding it hard to make ends meet, this will be a crippling cost.
James Gray, the Tory MP for North Wiltshire and president of the Association of British Riding Schools, said around 200 schools close down every year and he feared the new passport could spell the end for many more.
The Government maintains it has consulted widely and has the support of august bodies, such as the British Horse Society, one of a number of groups empowered to issue the passports. But Mr. Gray says there is outright hostility among ordinary owners and weekend riders represented by the ABRS, the Pony Club, the Donkey Breed Association, the Shetland Pony Association and many others.
The regulations will be enforced by trading standards officers with the power to enter stables and fields to see whether the horse matches the description on the passport. "The thought of a new army of jobsworths stalking the countryside checking the paperwork of horses fills me with dismay," said Mr Gray. "It is a bureaucratic solution to a problem that doesn't even exist."
What possible justification is there for this law that will cost the industry millions of pounds to implement and could send small businesses to the wall?
Alun Michael, the "minister for the horse" at the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs, said it would establish a database "which would be to the advantage of the horse industry in the event of horse diseases becoming a problem in this country". Asked in the Commons to identify what disease he had in mind, he failed to offer an example.
Some in the industry say there are spin-off advantages, such as allowing potential buyers to check whether an animal has been stolen and discovering how many horses and ponies there are in the country. But the principle reason is set out on Defra's own website: "It will satisfy the European Commission that the UK has a viable method of identifying horses that have been treated with medicines that must not be administered to food producing animals."
Since only a few thousand horses are slaughtered in this country and exported to Europe for food, why not limit the requirement to them? Why do a million owners have to go through this rigmarole because other countries have a taste for horsemeat?
Mr. Gray -- who is tabling two Commons motions today opposed to the regulations -- says the Government intends to remove a long-standing prohibition on exporting live horses other than high-value racehorses or stud animals. Combined with the passport, he suspects many more British horses will now be sold abroad for food, which is anathema to a country that is home to one quarter of all the horses in the EU.
There is a wider issue here about how we are governed and the cavalier use of legislation. This measure was brought in by way of a Statutory Instrument and was already law before MPs even had a chance to pass judgment. Moreover, the drafting was found to be seriously defective by a parliamentary monitoring committee, something the Government acknowledged.
In addition, the regulations covered only tame animals and therefore did not include thousands of semi-wild ponies on the West Country moors and in the New Forest for which separate arrangements have been made.
Yet instead of withdrawing them, ministers simply placed the flawed regulations on the Statute Book while promising to replace them with an unflawed version at a later date in order to "avoid confusion".
As Mr Bumble would have said, this law is an ass. And it does not need a passport to be identified as one.
______________
Guess there are some “anti-government separatist loons” in the UK too….Who would have thought?
Here are a few of the “banned” drugs mentioned in the comments following the market opinion piece I seem to remember one so called vet who was adamant about ivermectin not being studied in human consumption horses….guess that wasn’t as factual as we were led to believe…..
Don’t write to tell me this is not all of the drugs…..I realize that. It’s as far as I’ve gotten for several reasons so deal with it.
An Ivermectin containing wormer marketed in the UK as Eraquell http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Eraquell-horse-wormer-Larger-Tube-Treats-700kg-Bodyweight/productinfo/ERAQUELL reads as follows: Withdrawal period Horses may be slaughtered for human consumption only after 30 days from the last treatment.
A moxidectin containing wormer in the UK is marketed as Equest: http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 32 days of treatment.
A product containing moxidectin and praziquantel is marketed in the UK as Equest Promax http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 64 days of treatment.
Fenbendazole , a benzimidazole wormer marketed Panacur, Exodus, and Strongid P containing pyrantel are not allowed in horses to be used for human consumption.
Mebendazole, one of the benzimidazole wormers marketed as Telmin Granules http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Telmin-Granules-horse-wormer/productinfo/TELG/ has this statement (might be where the 180 days is coming from) indications, warnings, etc In accordance with the Horse Passport legislation (Commission Decision 2000/68/EC as implemented in national legislation), a 6 month withdrawal period applies to the use of this product.
Trivia for the day…..to the person who held Chinese racing up for demanding a $40,000 stipend of sorts for an owner to be allowed to race a horse as a model of humane foresight by a country looking after its equine athletes……Not so sure I’d bet the ranch on how much of that is in the interest of humane retirement for horses…….. The 2005 statistics for horses killed in China, 1.7 mil …..and just in case you think I made that up, go to the study outlining unintended consequences on a horse processing ban in the U.S. prepared for http://www.animalwelfarecouncil.org/ May 15, 2006. Do you think Chinese horse slaughter has gone from 1.7 mil to 0 in these past four years? Seriously?
Stop blaming the AQHA for all the wrongs in the world….It is not their responsibility to care for anyone’s horses. This is perhaps my favorite anti-slaughter oxymoron………If you can’t afford to humanely euthanize it you shouldn’t own it/what has the AQHA (or whatever association or person needing blamed at the time) done to care for unwanted horses…….Doesn’t anyone else see the crossed points here???????
Alex Brown has proclaimed we should keep the auction/rescue infrastructure we have only to administer grants payable to same for each horse they “humanely euthanize” or adopt. Am I the only one who finds this plan repulsive on several levels???????
RH1
Sunday, September 27, 2009
We Don’t Call It Rescue. Taking Care of Horses We Believe Deserve Better……..
I have fallen a bit behind on writing or commenting on the repetitive anti-slaughter delusional thinking. I apologize….I was busy with live horses. Being out of date, I don’t work on lap tops or prioritize my day to meet the needs of The Movement. When we started this thing I wrote a quip about growing up putting a matchbook under the eight track tape, please refer to that when things get slow. It doesn’t mean I am screwing someone else’s boyfriend, ex-husband, or significant other in pursuit of horse facilities. It doesn’t mean I am gathering statistics. It does not mean I have been arrested for animal neglect or cruelty. Nor does it mean I have gone away.
I see we are discussing rescues. I have a very narrow mind on the rescue issue for several reasons. I feel the only “rescues” allowed to operate under the 501c tax exemption should be those used to shelter law enforcement animal abuse seizures. Period. End of story. Everyone else can operate under the same tax codes I do. Donations are paychecks. The panhandling, manipulation, and writing of romantic horse fiction to solicit donations can continue. Forum networking twitter with other anti-slaughter people will still be available for drama fixes. Nothing will change except the tax fairy will have flown out the window. Breeders, trainers, farmers, ranchers, and all other livestock and equine operation manage to operate within the present agricultural tax laws so I don’t see a problem.
We here at the ranch and our anti-horse cohorts have been grilled about what we do. Most of our new found friends seem to think all we have done most of our lives is dream up ways to kill and keep killing horses. We don’t really like horses we are in this only for the money. I shy away from personal stories. I want to wretch every time I read a pink nylon bridle infested story about an auction rescue dragged from the kill pen and held up as proof slaughter is evil. It proves nothing more than someone got a horse they like cheap. So with that in mind, my personal program has little to do with a nationwide issue either.
I train horses. I buy and sell horses. I get most of my business from personal referrals and this feeds the misguided opinion I have that I may know a little about horses. I was contacted earlier this summer by a lady having problems with her mare on the recommendation of a mutual acquaintance. It was kind of a long drawn out tale of dumb mistakes (politically correct term, inexperienced) for which the horse was blamed.. Here’s my newly formed opinion.
If you can’t tell the difference between a good saddle and the no-fit, wither pinching, cardboard treed, urine tanned sale barn special please refrain from buying any horse whose veins can be seen through its skin, has no fetlock hair, and a shallow mouth with little thin lips. As a general rule, these horses don’t have the dumb ass tolerance you need to be safe. It may be dangerous for you and not in the best interest of the horse’s future.
Maybe those urine line draft cross “rescues” are in exactly the right hands. Maybe not, I have heard some draft crosses can make excellent saddle broncs.
This particular owner wanted a second opinion on her horse. I offered some suggestions on how to try to solve what I believed after handling the mare and seeing her owner’s tack, a pilot error/training problem and left. Several weeks later the “horselover” and her spouse decide not to spend money to have me put more training on the mare. They don’t want to spend the money for any lessons either. I don’t think they believed they needed to learn anything more. It’s best to sell the mare. I truly do realize I had an indirect hand in that decision by not offering to solve their problems simply for the personal reward of making life better for a horse. Greedy horse killing ***** that I am I wanted to be paid for either the training or the lessons. If an owner has a horse in training with me I don’t usually charge extra for trying to teach them to handle the horse.
My job in this particular case is to taking the mare to a sale. I haul sale horses for owners quite often. I charge a flat rate for a week’s worth of sale prep, and so much a mile for transport. So goes the rest of the story for this little mare.
The mare had actually, at one time, been started by someone who kind of spoke horse. She was decently (not out of this world) bred, cute made, and with some consistent riding could get pretty handy pretty quick. I don’t have time to do that. After all there is limit to what can be accomplished in 5 days. She will have to go with pretty much what she knows but she is clipped, hooves trimmed, bathed and ridden a few times. I think she is too good to kill without giving her the chance. What?????? A pro-slaughter horse dealer doesn’t want a horse to go to kill? Remember I don’t have a personal stake in whether this mare brings $210 or $2,100. I have already been paid.
Now pay attention because this is the trade secret to keeping horses out of the slaughter pipeline. I know this has become increasingly difficult over the years, K.B.s being so sneaky, underhanded, evil, and all. They live to kill horses and they will go to all lengths to feed this addiction. I am going to let you in on the solution to the problem. If everyone practiced this one thing there would be no horses killed ever. It’s called a reserve bid. Yep, that’s all it takes.
Goes kind of like this. “Jim, you workin’ the ring today”
“When don’t I”
“Well, what’s this mare worth to kill?”
Looking her over “$210, maybe $225”
“I’ll cover her to $300. I don’t need her but I think she is too good to kill. I don’t really want her but I’ll cover her that much.”
“I’ll look in the rafters for some bids.”
I didn’t end up owning the little mare. She went home with a nurse and her daughter in law who were looking for a project. She was well aware of everything I knew and didn’t know about the mare and believe it or not it doesn’t take weeks , months, or years to read a horse. There was no more stress or horror at the auction for the little mare than the first show in a horse’s career or maybe the first saddling. It was just another day at the office for both of us. It really isn’t that difficult to keep your horses (or in this particular case someone else’s) alive.
The moral to this little story….had the “horselovers” been responsible in rescues/anti-slaughter way of thinking the mare would have been dead. I would have been out my fee and the buyer would still be horseless. Had the mare not met the reserve she would be here in training now on the way to meeting the reserve and hopefully much more. Either way, she’d still be alive because of her “greedy irresponsible” owners.
Works for me….
Written by RH1
I see we are discussing rescues. I have a very narrow mind on the rescue issue for several reasons. I feel the only “rescues” allowed to operate under the 501c tax exemption should be those used to shelter law enforcement animal abuse seizures. Period. End of story. Everyone else can operate under the same tax codes I do. Donations are paychecks. The panhandling, manipulation, and writing of romantic horse fiction to solicit donations can continue. Forum networking twitter with other anti-slaughter people will still be available for drama fixes. Nothing will change except the tax fairy will have flown out the window. Breeders, trainers, farmers, ranchers, and all other livestock and equine operation manage to operate within the present agricultural tax laws so I don’t see a problem.
We here at the ranch and our anti-horse cohorts have been grilled about what we do. Most of our new found friends seem to think all we have done most of our lives is dream up ways to kill and keep killing horses. We don’t really like horses we are in this only for the money. I shy away from personal stories. I want to wretch every time I read a pink nylon bridle infested story about an auction rescue dragged from the kill pen and held up as proof slaughter is evil. It proves nothing more than someone got a horse they like cheap. So with that in mind, my personal program has little to do with a nationwide issue either.
I train horses. I buy and sell horses. I get most of my business from personal referrals and this feeds the misguided opinion I have that I may know a little about horses. I was contacted earlier this summer by a lady having problems with her mare on the recommendation of a mutual acquaintance. It was kind of a long drawn out tale of dumb mistakes (politically correct term, inexperienced) for which the horse was blamed.. Here’s my newly formed opinion.
If you can’t tell the difference between a good saddle and the no-fit, wither pinching, cardboard treed, urine tanned sale barn special please refrain from buying any horse whose veins can be seen through its skin, has no fetlock hair, and a shallow mouth with little thin lips. As a general rule, these horses don’t have the dumb ass tolerance you need to be safe. It may be dangerous for you and not in the best interest of the horse’s future.
Maybe those urine line draft cross “rescues” are in exactly the right hands. Maybe not, I have heard some draft crosses can make excellent saddle broncs.
This particular owner wanted a second opinion on her horse. I offered some suggestions on how to try to solve what I believed after handling the mare and seeing her owner’s tack, a pilot error/training problem and left. Several weeks later the “horselover” and her spouse decide not to spend money to have me put more training on the mare. They don’t want to spend the money for any lessons either. I don’t think they believed they needed to learn anything more. It’s best to sell the mare. I truly do realize I had an indirect hand in that decision by not offering to solve their problems simply for the personal reward of making life better for a horse. Greedy horse killing ***** that I am I wanted to be paid for either the training or the lessons. If an owner has a horse in training with me I don’t usually charge extra for trying to teach them to handle the horse.
My job in this particular case is to taking the mare to a sale. I haul sale horses for owners quite often. I charge a flat rate for a week’s worth of sale prep, and so much a mile for transport. So goes the rest of the story for this little mare.
The mare had actually, at one time, been started by someone who kind of spoke horse. She was decently (not out of this world) bred, cute made, and with some consistent riding could get pretty handy pretty quick. I don’t have time to do that. After all there is limit to what can be accomplished in 5 days. She will have to go with pretty much what she knows but she is clipped, hooves trimmed, bathed and ridden a few times. I think she is too good to kill without giving her the chance. What?????? A pro-slaughter horse dealer doesn’t want a horse to go to kill? Remember I don’t have a personal stake in whether this mare brings $210 or $2,100. I have already been paid.
Now pay attention because this is the trade secret to keeping horses out of the slaughter pipeline. I know this has become increasingly difficult over the years, K.B.s being so sneaky, underhanded, evil, and all. They live to kill horses and they will go to all lengths to feed this addiction. I am going to let you in on the solution to the problem. If everyone practiced this one thing there would be no horses killed ever. It’s called a reserve bid. Yep, that’s all it takes.
Goes kind of like this. “Jim, you workin’ the ring today”
“When don’t I”
“Well, what’s this mare worth to kill?”
Looking her over “$210, maybe $225”
“I’ll cover her to $300. I don’t need her but I think she is too good to kill. I don’t really want her but I’ll cover her that much.”
“I’ll look in the rafters for some bids.”
I didn’t end up owning the little mare. She went home with a nurse and her daughter in law who were looking for a project. She was well aware of everything I knew and didn’t know about the mare and believe it or not it doesn’t take weeks , months, or years to read a horse. There was no more stress or horror at the auction for the little mare than the first show in a horse’s career or maybe the first saddling. It was just another day at the office for both of us. It really isn’t that difficult to keep your horses (or in this particular case someone else’s) alive.
The moral to this little story….had the “horselovers” been responsible in rescues/anti-slaughter way of thinking the mare would have been dead. I would have been out my fee and the buyer would still be horseless. Had the mare not met the reserve she would be here in training now on the way to meeting the reserve and hopefully much more. Either way, she’d still be alive because of her “greedy irresponsible” owners.
Works for me….
Written by RH1
Saturday, September 19, 2009
What could be worse than slaughter? - update
This is an email I received concerning the most recent rescue of the rescued. The rescue being discussed has it's 501c3 status,they have a nice website, set up to take donations on line etc...etc... apparently they just don't have any sense? Anyway, here's the email and a link. If you want to read what the anti slaughter I loves horsies set are saying about this most recent atrocity follow the link.....
http://forums.prospero.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=AlexBrown&msg=41069.1
hey, RM, i wanted to post this link on the comment section of Thursday's blog, but couldn't get it to paste. if you can believe it, the story gets even worse. it appears that two rescues took their horses to the rescue that is starving and killing the horses. one of the rescues, when contacted about the condition of the horses, refused to pick the horses they took there up, and to date is still defending the one we're discussing. the other one has taken in horses, and is caring for them. one of her horses has died. SHE is being attacked, because she had horses at the rescue. what a friggin' mess!
http://forums.prospero.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=AlexBrown&msg=41069.1
hey, RM, i wanted to post this link on the comment section of Thursday's blog, but couldn't get it to paste. if you can believe it, the story gets even worse. it appears that two rescues took their horses to the rescue that is starving and killing the horses. one of the rescues, when contacted about the condition of the horses, refused to pick the horses they took there up, and to date is still defending the one we're discussing. the other one has taken in horses, and is caring for them. one of her horses has died. SHE is being attacked, because she had horses at the rescue. what a friggin' mess!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
What's worse than Slaughter? How about Equine Rescue?
see sto
ry
http://forums.delphiforums.com/ICERS/messages?msg=1555.1
The above links are yet another example of how Rescue has turned into long term torture for the horses unfortunate enough to fall into their care.While those on the Anti Slaughter side continue to re-live the past, and regale us with the findings of years ago, and talk about how things will never change, horses continue to suffer at a regular and alarming rate at the hands of those who are by their own definition more loving and compassionate than we back at the Ranch, on the Pro horse side will ever aspire to be.Thank God I'm on this side. I can't imagine the humanity involved in watching a horse slowly deteriorate day after day right in front of my eyes. What kind of special love and compassion is required to allow not one, but multiple horses to slowly starve, often walking over the dead carcasses of their herd mates in search of food and water that isn't there? The captive bolt? The smell of blood? The sense of panic when loaded onto a crowded trailer? I think it must pale in comparison to the living hell a horse must experience day after day when receiving the loving care only those blessed with a "special understanding" of the horse can supply. And what gifted person closes the door each night, walks into their own home and sits down to dinner while slow death is going on right outside that door? If I seem a little pissed off, or a bit cruel, well, I just am. I am so sick and tired of not only reading these damned stories, but the finger pointing and justifying that goes along with them. Hey, here's an idea, it would appear that Rescue is inhumane, why not get some legislation on the table to stop it? I think it's the moral thing to do before even one more horse enters the "Rescue Pipeline".Yes, I know there are a lot of good, responsible Rescues out there. I support some of them. I am just sick to death reading about the other ones while hearing about the inhumanity of Slaughter. And we are certainly hearing about the others on a fairly regular basis lately. I wonder what the Anti Slaughter side thinks about that?
Written by RH2
note:
RH2, I know you were being a little bit facetious when you said
“Hey, here's an idea, it would appear that Rescue is inhumane, why not get some legislation on the table to stop it? I think it's the moral thing to do before even one more horse enters the "Rescue Pipeline".
However I really do feel that there are not enough legal guidelines for rescues. Sure they have to clear a couple hurdles and jump through a hoop or two to get their tax exempt status (or so I am told) But there seem to be no physical requirements, no real rules to follow in the care and upkeep of the horses and facilities. Obviously there is no organization or officials inspecting facilities or checking on the animals even periodically. I am disgusted with the whole damn thing!!
Thank you for writing this, we all need to pay attention to what is really going on and not be fooled or side tracked by the anti side anymore.
R.M
ooops almost forgot.... Vicki......
she has her google alert set to notify her when her name is used. LOL
ryhttp://forums.delphiforums.com/ICERS/messages?msg=1555.1
The above links are yet another example of how Rescue has turned into long term torture for the horses unfortunate enough to fall into their care.While those on the Anti Slaughter side continue to re-live the past, and regale us with the findings of years ago, and talk about how things will never change, horses continue to suffer at a regular and alarming rate at the hands of those who are by their own definition more loving and compassionate than we back at the Ranch, on the Pro horse side will ever aspire to be.Thank God I'm on this side. I can't imagine the humanity involved in watching a horse slowly deteriorate day after day right in front of my eyes. What kind of special love and compassion is required to allow not one, but multiple horses to slowly starve, often walking over the dead carcasses of their herd mates in search of food and water that isn't there? The captive bolt? The smell of blood? The sense of panic when loaded onto a crowded trailer? I think it must pale in comparison to the living hell a horse must experience day after day when receiving the loving care only those blessed with a "special understanding" of the horse can supply. And what gifted person closes the door each night, walks into their own home and sits down to dinner while slow death is going on right outside that door? If I seem a little pissed off, or a bit cruel, well, I just am. I am so sick and tired of not only reading these damned stories, but the finger pointing and justifying that goes along with them. Hey, here's an idea, it would appear that Rescue is inhumane, why not get some legislation on the table to stop it? I think it's the moral thing to do before even one more horse enters the "Rescue Pipeline".Yes, I know there are a lot of good, responsible Rescues out there. I support some of them. I am just sick to death reading about the other ones while hearing about the inhumanity of Slaughter. And we are certainly hearing about the others on a fairly regular basis lately. I wonder what the Anti Slaughter side thinks about that?
Written by RH2
note:
RH2, I know you were being a little bit facetious when you said
“Hey, here's an idea, it would appear that Rescue is inhumane, why not get some legislation on the table to stop it? I think it's the moral thing to do before even one more horse enters the "Rescue Pipeline".
However I really do feel that there are not enough legal guidelines for rescues. Sure they have to clear a couple hurdles and jump through a hoop or two to get their tax exempt status (or so I am told) But there seem to be no physical requirements, no real rules to follow in the care and upkeep of the horses and facilities. Obviously there is no organization or officials inspecting facilities or checking on the animals even periodically. I am disgusted with the whole damn thing!!
Thank you for writing this, we all need to pay attention to what is really going on and not be fooled or side tracked by the anti side anymore.
R.M
ooops almost forgot.... Vicki......
she has her google alert set to notify her when her name is used. LOL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
