[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Barbaro was put down ultimately for humane reasons. As in they’d gathered gallons of his goo and he’d suddenly outweighed his usefulness.
[/QUOTE]
If by “his goo” you mean sperm, no they didn’t. Horses produced by artificial insemination are banned from thoroughbred racing. All such racehorses are still produced by old fashioned animal sex.
[QUOTE=cricetus]
I’ve never understood the “well, they’re animals,” argument to justify cruelty and inhumane treatment of animals.
[/QUOTE]
The idea is that, since animals are inferior to people, we don’t have the same sort of ethical obligations to them that we do to people So, actions that would be considered cruel if you did them to people (eating them, testing medications on them, keeping them as pets, hunting them as sport, racing them, etc.), are ok to do to animals.
[QUOTE=KarlGrenze]
Laminitis as a complication of a broken leg. His implants were working perfectly, but he didn’t have a sound leg yet in which to fall back after developing laminitis on the others.
And yea, laminitis, depending on the severity of it, can be treated and the animals live for many years… but that is with care and treatment, which (as far as I know) does not include racing. Thoroughbreds that cannot race or be used for breeding are SOL.
[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. I used to ride a former racing thoroughbred who wound up at a riding stable. Originally bought post-racing to breed polo ponies, after the polo stopped at the stable and the place became a riding stable he was gelded and went on to become a very good horse for training new riders. Last I saw him he was in his middle-twenties, a very respectable age for any horse.
The point being that thoroughbreds that are post-racing and not used for stud for more thoroughbreds still have uses. They’re valuable horses, even if they weren’t champions, and until the rise of organizations like greyhound rescues were far more likely to have a long and pleasant life post-racing than any other racing animal.
[QUOTE=NinetyWt]
Not ponies, other thoroughbreds.
[/QUOTE]
No, thoroughbreds are often used in the siring of polo ponies. Adds speed to the mix of genes, you see.
[QUOTE=Cubsfan]
I just read about that. I’m trying to figure out how a race horse can be in such bad shape that BOTH of its ankles during a race. Huh? That doesn’t seem strange to anyone? It sounds like they just exploded or something. Are these horses all hopped up on drugs and what not? Why would it be so fragile? Was the jockey running it too hard?
I don’t know anything about horse racing so I’m asking those questions in all seriousness.
[/QUOTE]
Horses break legs and ankles even when they’re not running the Kentuicky Derby. I’ve known of horses trotting around in their paddocks that stepped in a hole, tripped, and broke a leg. It can be just as simple as a fucking accident. Maintaining the surface of a racetrack is very important for that very reason - at the speed at which racing horses run a stumble can snap a bone and hole/dip in the track, even a small one, can be deadly. After a breakdown like Barbaro’s, nevermind 8 Bell’s, examination of the track is routine and if there is a problem found the track can be held liable.
Although yes, TWO broken ankles at once is extremely fucked up bad and strange. That could have been to genetic defect, undetected stress fractures from training too hard, or maybe something else.
With two broken forelegs there was simply no way to save this animal. She could have been subjected to months of discomfort, pain, and distress in a futile attempt to correct the fractures, after which she would need to be put down, or they could kill her quickly at the track. It’s a harsh decision, but rational person understands why she was killed sooner rather than later. With just one bum leg she might have a chance at a normal horse life. With two there was no hope.
[QUOTE=cricetus]
I’ve never understood the “well, they’re animals,” argument to justify cruelty and inhumane treatment of animals.
[/QUOTE]
understood
Me either. Animals need to be treated with respect always.
Something I have never understood is our “kindness” to animals. “My” cat/dog/horse/bird/rabbit is in terrible pain! Nothing can be done! It is incredibly cruel to let my pet suffer. I must take the “humane” road and have my suffering cat gently killed.
Just say my grandmother is in severe pain, she has an incurable condition/illness. I visit her frequently. When I visit it reminds her that life used to be so much better. When my visit ends she is still in agonising pain.
Next time I visit I tell her the sad news that I had to have the cat put to sleep because it was in pain, she smiles. I leave and she is in agnonising pain.
On my next visit a horrible thing has happened, there was a horse race and a horse suffered broken legs and had to be put down. I leave and she is in terrible pain and there is no known cure.
When I leave the hospital my face is streaming with tears and I probably shouldn’t be driving but I am. I hit a dog who wanders onto the street. It’s pelvis is crushed, there may be internal injuries also. I take the dog to the vet. The dog is put out of it’s misery (and mine?).
I tell my grandmother the wretched story on my next visit. She smiles…or was it a wince? I leave her in agnonising pain.
Yes that was bullshit!
While I agree it is not OK to let pets suffer, everytime I hear about a pet or a “valuable” animal put down so it doesn’t suffer it makes me cringe. What about the grandmother! Why is it ok to let our horse/dog/cat end it’s life peacefully, painlessly but not our grandmother? Why do we want to care right to the last minute for our cat/dog while we still have bits of cow/pig/chicken/lamb between our teeth?
I absolutely do not want animals to suffer, not the ones I love nor the ones I eat! But more importantly I want to see people afforded the same ‘HUMANITY’ that is offered to dogs, cats and horses. Surely euthanasia for people is something we need to accept.
Is there a time when we will be able to accept that because we can be humane to dogs and cats that we should absolutely offer the same kindness to people?
[QUOTE=Broomstick]
If by “his goo” you mean sperm, no they didn’t. Horses produced by artificial insemination are banned from thoroughbred racing. All such racehorses are still produced by old fashioned animal sex.
[/QUOTE]
Did I say anything about making another thoroughbred from a straw of Barbaro? Yeah, you and MLS are right about insemination re the rules of the dumbass jockey club, but so what – Barbaro’s still a significant member of the bloodline. While the owners claim they kept none of his sperm, I can’t imagine why they wouldn’t have. Just my opinion.
[QUOTE=Broomstick]
Horses break legs and ankles even when they’re not running the Kentuicky Derby. I’ve known of horses trotting around in their paddocks that stepped in a hole, tripped, and broke a leg.
[/QUOTE]
To me that’s every bit as irresponsible as whipping an animal to make it run faster. People with holey pastures don’t deserve to keep a horse.
And how do you suggest that people who own pastures keep their pastures free of holes? Do you think the holes appear spontaneously? They are dug by burrowing animals, and the only way to stop them from doing so is to remove them from the pasture. Of course, killing them would be wrong, so I suppose the only option is to litter the pasture with live traps (and hope the horses don’t trip over them) and release the burrowers someplace else, where presumably there are no horses to step in their holes.
[QUOTE=LurkMeister]
And how do you suggest that people who own pastures keep their pastures free of holes?
[/quote]
You don’t need me to teach you how to use a shovel, do you?
Now you’re going to lecture me on prairie dogs? I live in a fricking desert.
There’s a rule around here: “All pastures will be walked weekly.” It’s really not that tough.
[QUOTE=Broomstick]
The point being that thoroughbreds that are post-racing and not used for stud for more thoroughbreds still have uses. They’re valuable horses, even if they weren’t champions, and until the rise of organizations like greyhound rescues were far more likely to have a long and pleasant life post-racing than any other racing animal.
[/QUOTE]
You’re right, many post-racing horses (particularly if they have been good racers) can lead good lives.
Not all of them do, and for many owners, keeping a laminitic horse (depending on the severity) that cannot ride and is not useful as a breeder animal is a pain. So the animal ends up euthanized if it is unable to fill either one of those career paths.
And even in your case, even if you were able to ride the horse, it was not as intense as a race, and it got care to prevent laminitis development.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Did I say anything about making another thoroughbred from a straw of Barbaro? Yeah, you and MLS are right about insemination re the rules of the dumbass jockey club, but so what – Barbaro’s still a significant member of the bloodline. While the owners claim they kept none of his sperm, I can’t imagine why they wouldn’t have. Just my opinion.To me that’s every bit as irresponsible as whipping an animal to make it run faster. People with holey pastures don’t deserve to keep a horse.
[/QUOTE]
I have 2 questions for you.
The owners say they don’t have any sperm from Barbaro, you think they are lying and they do. What would they do with it? They can’t sell it, or if they use it, the can’t sell the horse because they can’t prove the linage. So why would they have it?
People with holey pastures don’t deserve horses? Who the hell are you? Here in Alberta we have tons of real horses that live and work on “holey” pastures. The difference is these horses are not so fucking fragile that if they step on a twig they break their goddamn legs. I would love to shoot every critter here that makes holes in the pastures, but then the coyotes and hawks and other critters that eat the hole makers would eat my critters. Or maybe it’s just the fact that so many ranchers have literally thousands of acres with quite a few holes in it, that your arrogant statement pisses me off.
What happens to horses when they are euthanised at a race event, typically? Are they made into dog food (or glue) or buried?
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
If we hadn’t destroyed the natural environment horses would still be eating and fucking and roaming, and not running unless absolutely necessary.I don’t eat meat. Sorry.
[/QUOTE]
And while the horses are eating and fucking and roaming, they’ll also be savagely attacked and killed by mountain lions, and bears, and other predators.
Compared to that life, maybe being forced to run a bit isn’t so bad, even if they do risk injuring themselves? Surely the probability of a horse being killed in the wild by a predator is much higher than the chance it will break its leg in a race?
I have never understood this “Oh, animals are so precious and we must keep them from all harm! I could never eat an animal!” point of view. What the hell do you think happens to animals in the wild? Hint: they get eaten.
calm kiwi, here in Oregon we passed the Death With Dignity Act and we’ve been fighting with the Supreme Court over it ever since. We happen to agree with you that suffering humans should be allowed to choose whether or not their quality of life is worth continuing, but apparently we’re in the minority. We see it as an issue of health care to be decided between patient and physician.
The thing that pisses me off most about the attempt to save Barbaro’s leg is that the owners wanted to preserve him for breeding - millions to be made in allowing your Derby winner to sire babies, after all, and don’t doubt for a second that breeders wouldn’t be lining up to have him cover their mares.
Seriously, think about that. Babaro was proven to have legs like twigs and someone wanted to spend millions repairing them simply to pass those genes on? For real?
[QUOTE=Myrnalene]
This is what you wanted to see? That would be more respectful?
I’m astonished you’re put off because network coverage was * not * maudlin and sensational for once.
Her team was not available for comment in the immediate aftermath of the race, anyway. They were slightly busy.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with this, but would add that a two or three sentence reference, done with grace and dignity, would have gone far to make NBC at least seem human. (not sure Bob Costas is human).
horses run because they can. Yes, it’s been bred into them, but it’s also inherent. What do some of the posters here think happens to a gazelle or a wild mustang that breaks its ankle? It gets left behind and gets eaten. Hello?
[QUOTE=Capt. Ridley’s Shooting Party]
What happens to horses when they are euthanised at a race event, typically? Are they made into dog food (or glue) or buried?
[/QUOTE]
Animals euthanized by injection are not fit for consumption (human or animal). They’re either buried or cremated. IIRC, some of the horses have been buried in the racetracks they competed.
[QUOTE=FarmerChick]
I have 2 questions for you.
So? Who gives a shit? My stock deserves better than a lousy owner who’d let them trot in a holey paddock. BTW: we’re not talking about acreage acreage. Perhaps our definitions of “pasture” are different. To me, it’s a manageable spit of land (fenced 1-5 acres) on which good grasses can grow. “Manageable” means no goddamned holes. Also, I might work them from time to time or go 'sploring, but I would never dream of letting my boys and girls run loose on our 140 wild acres out in Collbran.
[QUOTE=calm kiwi]
I absolutely do not want animals to suffer, not the ones I love nor the ones I eat! But more importantly I want to see people afforded the same ‘HUMANITY’ that is offered to dogs, cats and horses. Surely euthanasia for people is something we need to accept.
[/QUOTE]
I think the reason we put animals to sleep but not people goes something like this:
An animal is not capable of higher intellectual processes, so once its body is hopelessly broken it really doesn’t have anything more to offer people or any reason left to live.
However, we tend to think that human beings still have worth and value even if their body is compromised. People are capable of finding an intellectual reason to continue living even with a failing body (like, say, wanting to live to see a child’s wedding or to continue to pass on their knowledge to others). I can give examples of terminally ill people who still did worthwhile things with their time left if need be.
So I think that has something to do with why we (as a society) are inclined to put animals to sleep instead of paying $500 for a surgery that might prolong its life, but yet at the same time think it’s worth spending a lot more on hospital and/or hospice care for Grandma’s final months of life instead of putting her to sleep too.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Perhaps our definitions of “pasture” are different.
[/QUOTE]
Uhh…yeah. On the farm on which I grew up the YARD is 5 acres, and if any large animal is on it it’s jumped the fence from the considerably larger pasture.