@ old onion bags | July 10, 2012 at 4:02 PM |

Putting aside the ‘Legalese’ I would wish to side with Onions concerning the dastardly and unconscionable treatment meted out to these poor animals. Is this a reflection of our society? I am not surprised at the way our senior citizens are treated just like the rejects of the Equine Sporting World. You are no longer of economic value so skedaddle out of here! MADD song is a grim reminder of our sorry moral state despite all the free education and material achievements of the last 40 years.
As Onions pointed out no poor man can own a race horse in it prime. Horses are no longer bred as a means of transport or as workhorses. There are only off loaded on stupid black people who are financially or emotionally incapable of looking after such a naturally beautiful animal.

Maybe the owners of these ‘has-been’ race horses could be a bit more “humanely imaginative” and create an exotic niche market for horse meat à la Francȃis. But this type of creative thinking is far beyond the social remnants of a totally inbred lot of materialistic jackasses.

And Miller is following Onions in the U turn. And I can agree with Miller now, except in one small respect. My turf-ite friend told me that there is an alarming amount of theft of horses going on, so the suggestion that these horses are somehow being unfairly off-loaded on to poor unsuspecting people I cannot agree with. Seems that many of them illegally take possession (read “steal”) these horses. So maybe cheval a la mode is already on quite a few Bajan menus these days. But man, the U turns.

Come on Amused
….stolen?!
That sounds LAME!
An owner has his horse stolen and what?!? The culprit hides the horse in his bedroom until things cool down…?
LOLOLOLOL
This is Barbados, where maliciousness was created….

Come again Amused,… or Bushie will be forced to do the unthinkable…..
….side with Onions 🙂

The writer never sought in his article to address who is right or wrong in a particular insular traffic mishap

******

Wow Onions referring to himself in the third person, must be Royalty; we are not amused.

Rather than banning horses why couldn’t you focus the debate about the many animals behind the wheels that are likely to be inebriated to the gills with the local fermented product?. There doesn’t seem to be any redress if one is harmed by these folks who can “hold their liquor”, as this first world country has been unable to implement laws with respect to breathalyzer testing.

Maybe the answer is to ban cars instead

@Miller

Maybe the owners of these ‘has-been’ race horses could be a bit more “humanely imaginative” and create an exotic niche market for horse meat à la Francȃis.
*********

Any consumption of horse meat (never mind what happened to Queens Palace) in these parts will be looked upon very unfavourably by groups e.g. PETA.

They can initiate boycotts which will be harmful to small countries, unlike other larger jurisdictions which can thumb their noses at the.

Barbados used to export Green Monkeys for scientific purposes to Canada and Air Canada was forced to stop transporting them when the Animal Rights groups started to pressure the Airline so if you want to consume Black Beauty visit France or Québec.

@Sargeant

It is enough to make anyone puke!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-HK_Kqqxv0&feature=player_embedded

@ac ”real task at hand should be getting individuals to owning up to their share of responsibilty”

Everyone to be responsible, not just horse owners or ex, but drivers etc etc, one must look at the whole issue, not just one part. Why worry about a few horses when ZR and trucks threaten lives every day? That is my point on being balanced.

People get emotional and rant but dont think about the whole issue. And the whole issue is road safety, at least in the context of the original post.

@Onions ”@ Crusoe You need more time in solitude.’

Just accept that people have different views, and some of us are right.

😉

This is pretty gruesome but here is what can happen to a horse when hit by a car travelling at speed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrCHLqit2K8&feature=fvwrel

At first I could not believe it.

Then I checked the weight of a horse and found it can be less than half the weight of a car depending on the breed and the nutrition.

From wikipedia I got for a horse:

“The size of horses varies by breed, but also is influenced by nutrition. Light riding horses usually range in height from 14 to 16 hands (56 to 64 inches, 142 to 163 cm) and can weigh from 380 to 550 kilograms (840 to 1,200 lb).[24] Larger riding horses usually start at about 15.2 hands (62 inches, 157 cm) and often are as tall as 17 hands (68 inches, 173 cm), weighing from 500 to 600 kilograms (1,100 to 1,300 lb).[25] Heavy or draft horses are usually at least 16 hands (64 inches, 163 cm) high and can be as tall as 18 hands (72 inches, 183 cm) high. They can weigh from about 700 to 1,000 kilograms (1,500 to 2,200 lb).[26]”

From Google I got for a 2012 Toyota Corolla:

http://cars.findthebest.com/q/1252/3256/What-is-the-weight-of-a-2012-Toyota-Corolla-S

@ John
From wikipedia I got for a horse:
……………………………………………………………….
From Google I got for a 2012 Toyota Corolla:
*************************************************************************
By your posting above…….could you by chance be also disputing our learned friend Amused point ……that a horse is not a “vehicle”, and should not be under any circumstance be construed as such.As to how he assumed such a stance boggles beyond all logic. Why by his argument ..it seems as long as you can provide transport for man(using the roadways)…..oneit automatically becomes a “vehicle”. Common sense dictates otherwise.

Whether drivers and other parties are to blame as Crusoe and others are suggesting,it stands to reason that the wonton way old race horses are being ‘gifted’ to all and sundry is contributing to the problem. One does not have to do any serious analysis to arrive at such a conclusion.

old onion bags | July 11, 2012 at 5:19 AM |
@ John
From wikipedia I got for a horse:
……………………………………………………………….
From Google I got for a 2012 Toyota Corolla:
*************************************************************************
By your posting above…….could you by chance be also disputing our learned friend Amused point ……that a horse is not a “vehicle”, and should not be under any circumstance be construed as such.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am just showing the weight advantage a car can have over a horse ….. I could do the same analysis for a bicycle too with a different result.

There is only one likely outcome for the horse in a collision with a car and that is death for the horse.

In countries where Deer and Wild Boar also use the roads as crossings, accidents do happen …. and people die.

There are usually signs to alert drivers to the danger.

There is however a difference between Deer and Wild Boar … and a horse.

No human can be responsible for the whereabouts of wild anmals.

All the authorities can do is signpost and warn of likely danger.

I have only just seen this…but for what it’s worth my vote is with Amused, Crusoe, Victor et al. It has all been said….except that to Miller…

What is the causal connection between not having a dog licence and a dog doing something on the road it shouldn’t? Ditto for horses. All the licence does is to make the owner traceable (maybe) and so responsible IF he is – apart from the offence of not having the licence.

I am not a turf-ite but if the owners of retired race horses pass them on to responsible people – so far as can be judged – isn’t that far better than killing them? Is there evidence that they are not doing this? I haven’t read any I think.

Drivers will stop suddenly to allow a bimbo to cross the road but, in my experience, they have little regard for animals on the road.

The problem is that most Bim car drivers think they are advanced motorists and that nothing will ever happen to them…….and many do not think at all once behind the wheel. And 75mph at night? OR at any time on our roads?

@ robert ross | July 11, 2012 at 8:26 AM |
“What is the causal connection between not having a dog licence and a dog doing something on the road it shouldn’t? Ditto for horses. All the licence does is to make the owner traceable (maybe) and so responsible IF he is – apart from the offence of not having the licence.”

Let’s put aside the careless and arrogant drivers aka road hogs and deal with those defensive drivers and other road users, including children. Since you cannot sue a dog or horse who should be held negligent for damages to an innocent driver, pedestrian or child caused by the wandering horse which becomes spooked or disorientated? As you might know horses can become rather nervous and agitated in unfamiliar surroundings where noise and unaccustomed activities are taking place.

Who would be responsible for pain, suffering and medical costs resulting from a bite to a child or pedestrian by a wandering Rottweiler or Japanese Akita?
Hence the need to control and regulate the movement of these animals that are deliberately raised in domestic settings by humans who can afford ownership.
The same way doctors and (if ever possible) lawyers are expected to register to protect or offer some form of redress to the public against malpractice and fraud from the quacks and fraudsters in the professions the owners of animals that go ‘off track’ and cause damage or injury to innocent bystanders should be held liable for everything that ensues. The police can’t charge the animal or the injured party can’t sue the animal to recover damages.
Maybe your expertise in the law of Tort might come to a different position.
There might also have been cases in English law where animals were charged and put down for their “crimes”.

miller

The same way doctors and (if ever possible) lawyers are expected to register to protect or offer some form of redress to the public against malpractice and fraud from the quacks and fraudsters in the professions the owners of animals that go ‘off track’ and cause damage or injury to innocent bystanders should be held liable for everything that ensues.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The registration of professionals is not to protect the public against malpractice and fraud or to offer some form of redress.

Malpractice or fraud can occur whether they are registered or not.

My bet is that any professional accused of malpractice or fraud in Barbados will be registered.

Among other things, registration allows a professional to put up his/her shingle and sell services associated with his/her profession to the public without opening themselves to a charge of breaching of the law regulating his/her profession.

It also allows the public to differentiate between the real thing and the not so real thing ….. if and only if the public chooses to check.

…… however, cows, horses, sheep and goats very often have a brand of some sort, an identifying mark.

If such was the case and the police have it then behind the scenes detective work will lead to the owner.

If you want registration for all tame animals, simple. Microchip them. I have no problem with that. I think it is an excellent idea. Microchipping is standard in Barbados now. Make it mandatory. Then next time, if there ever is a next time, you will be able to identify horse (or cow or sheep or dog) AND owner – and you still will not be able to do ANYTHING. Meanwhile, it will certainly help to prevent theft of domestic animals, because prosecutions will be much simpler

But in a case like this, the person identified as owning the deceased animal might turn round and sue you, or your insurance company. There is a case in Nebraska where a horse escaped on to the highway and was killed by a motorist travelling at well in excess of the speed limit and without due care and attention – there was no detail on whether he had been drinking or not, so one has to assume NOT. The motorist sued the horse owner and lost – and the horse owner counter-sued the motorist AND WON!!!!!

The moral of the story is, “Be very careful what you unearth – you may wish you hadn’t.”

Onions

Aren’t you tired of beating this dead horse? The issue of horses on the road (living or dead) is infinitesimal compared to the other issues that Bajans face on the road daily.

Now get back to canvassing.

Where to start with this argument. First my condolences to the family of the deceased and his passenger who was injured in this unfortunate accident.

As a horse owner and rider of quite a few mango seasons there are several issues here.

The first is the disposal of retired race horses. There is no doubt that some owners are irresponsible in giving horses to people who have neither the facilities nor the financial wherewithal to care for these animals properly. These are usually people who have no real love of horses and may be in racing for the prestige or as a consequence of the disillusioned view that there is money to be made. And Onions is right it is cheaper to give a horse away to the first taker, than euthanise it or try to find a proper home for it.

As the authority that controls racing I am not certain how, other than by moral suasion and education the Turf Club can regulate how a private citizen disposes of his private property? Yes they can implement the implantation of readable chips to track horses, although this is done for purposes of identification to eliminate fraud in very large racing jurisdictions and not to track ownership outside of racing or breeding. But this will not prevent the practice it will only identify who the owner was at the time the horse was in racing. Besides which the chips are removable my surgical means. How will you hold a man responsible for an animal he no longer owns?

Someone asked my opinion about what could be done in the aftermath of the horrible accident on Egerton Road and my suggestion was for a national public relations programme against this practice of the indiscriminate disposal of racehorses . Lets be honest here, we Barbadians in general are not known for our compassion to animals. Every day I see all kinds of animals being “kept” in deplorable conditions. Thoroughbreds do not fare well tied out on a 20 foot rope in the hot sun day in and day out even with fresh water and adequate supplies of grain and grass. Many of these animals suffer terribly and end up either dying or being euthanized by the RSPCA.

I too have heard stories of horses being stolen and in fact saw a posting on a Facebook site that deals primarily with missing dogs about a stolen horse. So there is some validity in this.

Next to horses on the highway. I have ridden on the highways for years. As a youngster I used to ride from Brighton to District A at least once a year to participate in shows at the Mounted Branch’s arena. Also used to ride to Holders, next to the polo field to compete in shows there and to Queen’s Park to the Exhibition. More recently I cross the highway to get from one cart road to another. Over this period of time the attitude of drivers to horses being ridden on the road has changed remarkably. Its as if drivers do not understand the possible danger of passing within two or three feet of a living creature at 60 or 80 k.p.h.

I was told by a senior police officer in charge of the Mounted Branch some years ago that horses while being led, driven or ridden, have the ‘right of way’ on the road. And no this is not some arcane English hand me down law. It is plain common sense. A horse like any animal or small child is a living breathing thing that cannot appreciate the danger of motorized transport. My advice is to do what I do any time I encounter young children or animals on the road; reduce your speed and give them as wide a berth as possible to allow for any impulsive behavior on their part. Plain common sense and consideration for other users of the road.

The question of liability for an animal that has strayed onto the highway is a matter for the lawyers, but as a layman I imagine there might have to be some proof of negligence on the part of the owner in order to make any claim for compensation.

For people who ride horses on the road they have a responsibility like any other user of the road to do so with due care and attention.

Bottom line is that the problem of stray horses and reckless riding on our highways can be reduced if the people who own these wonderful animals are knowledgeable about their care and are responsible in their use of the road. If they don’t fit that bill they should not be given horses. Seems like a bigger social problem that will not be solved by banning.

Agree that there needs to be at least a PR campaign to make general public aware of the issues associate with stray animals, horses in particular which because of size are likely to cause serious injury, death even.

@Old Onions. Then, once the horse is identified, I shall look forward to Sen Verla Depieza presenting her case in court. I haven’t had a really good laugh for a long time, so I am looking forward to it. Let me see her opening statement (or rather what it should be) will be interesting:

“My Lord/Lady, the driver was quietly proceeding along Egerton Road, Saint George, a very narrow road constantly in need ot repairs and with several pot holes, that runs between Stepney and St David’s, at approximately half past midnight. He was not excessively speeding, but proceeding as is his right as a taxpayer and car owner, at a mere 75+ miles per hour. When he and his car were attacked by a rabid horse [Barbados being a rabes free zone] which, although stationary and blinded by the car lights, flung itself on his car, so startling him that he drove his car another 400 yards into a ploughed cane field, before it came to a stop. As a result of the horse’s attack on my client, both he and the horse expired, which is the horses fault for getting in the way of a car driven at a mere +75 mph, for how, travelling at such a low speed, could the driver be expected to notice something as small as a horse.”

I would imagine the owner of the horse would want to have it identified as his/hers.

How else will he/she be able to claim recompense from the estate of the deceased if he/she can’t prove the horse is his/hers?

Onions,

you can scream and gyrate, but you have now gone back, from the general issue of ‘responsible ownership of animals’, to the specific ase again.

Amused is right on the specific case, IF the car was travelling at 75mph, it is unlikely that any recompense is or should be due.

Only a moron would drive a car at that speed, unless you are trying to get someone to the hospital or get to the scene of a crime to protect someone.

As Amused said, supposed Aunt Maisie was walking bak acroos the road from nephew John’s after delivering the pudding and souse for the Sunday lunch, that she was up cooking, before going to sleep?

It would be Aunt Maisie in the car instead of the horse,IF the car was travelling at that speed.
Now again, what issue is being discussed here:

– the issue of the specific indident? OR
– the responsible care and treatment of animals (which may be related to but does not fulfill the interpretation of the reason for the incident above mentioned) ? OR
– the general issue of safety on the roads?

You have indicated above that it is not the third, so one of the first two, which is it?

Rules and regulations governing the second can be discussed and hashed out.

The only way to derive a solution on the second is, as Amused says, on the merits of the case, including car speed etc.

That is the non-emtional reality.

@Ms. Hughes et al ”Plain common sense and consideration for other users of the road”

Now THAT is a problem, every day I am avoiding some idiot who believes that the road is theirs and theirs alone. Horses are the least of my road worries.

If the car were travelling at 75mph then more reason for the owner of the horse to sue!!

It would be a shoo in.

But the horse owner isn’t coming forward.

It is looking as though the horse owner will have to be tracked down if his/her identity is to be known.

What does that tell you about the various interpretations of the law put forward here?