Racehorses Dying

[Ausmumof3]

Ditto. I love dog racing too, but wish certain participants in it would leave the sport.

 

Most of these animals love what they do - it shows. Those that don't never really make it to the track and in my youth I worked at a barn that gave many of those decent careers showing. We took a couple off the track (flat or chasers) too.

 

Sports can be hard on bodies - human or animal. That's part of life. It doesn't mean those who love what they are doing need to stop or that people ought to quit watching sports.

 

I've never, ever been against horse slaughter. It's a good way to put to use the bodies of equines without homes - far better than euthanizing them and letting others get raised for food instead. It's not like we're going to stop folks (or critters) from eating horses. They're a prey animal that many opt to eat, not unlike beef.

Yes and even productive beef and dairy cows are culled if they don't produce often enough. There life span can be about 12 years instead of the maximum 30

[creekland]

Even more disturbing is the number of eventers that have been killed in the past few months.  It's even more tragic when it's the riders who are dying.  It is senseless.

 

This is why my personal mortality doesn't stress me out.  I got over it long ago when I decided to ride.  ;)  I'd much rather "live" and die young than grow into old age and have done absolutely nothing.  That motto still runs my life.

 

It's not senseless at all.  For some of us, it's enjoying life to its fullest doing what we enjoy.

 

Quite honestly, I'm far more "afraid" of a nursing home!

 

Animals may well love to run, or compete in some way, and work with humans.  But events that predictably ruin their bodies through stress, use of performance drugs, and regular injuries, aren't about either sport or the enjoyment of the animal or its natural function.  It is about entertainment and making money for people, or feeding their egos.  It's abuse just like it would be if we were talking about some underage gymnast.

 

There are things I would change about horse racing if I were Grand Pumba of the Universe.  Not racing 2 year olds would be my first change.  If that change alone were put into the sport more horses would have a better life for the same reason we've tried to ban underage gymnasts.  We don't start our ponies until they are three years of age, sometimes four.

 

It is a money deal there for sure - it'd mean one more year of horse upkeep before one could start to see if they were interested and capable of their job or not.

 

But last I checked, I wasn't voted into the Grand Pumba position... I'm not ditching the whole sport because of it.

 

I have no problem with eating meat.  I have some significant issues with factory farming practices.  I think meat eating is something where we need to treat the animals involved well and be very concious of what we are doing - killing for our sustenance.  

...

I don't think the laws against horse slaughter in the US have done horses any favours, and I don't actually have a problem with eating horses.  But that isn't really what this is about IMO.

 

The worst change was forcing the slaughterhouses to close when in reality there ought to be more of them - spread out - killing fewer per location, but meaning less travel for those headed there.  By closing them it caused folks to have to ship to Mexico or Canada.  Mexico, in particular, is well known for awful slaughter conditions.  It helped those horses a TON by having them have to travel further to get into worse conditions.   :cursing:

 

Some folks have a tough time seeing the Real World vs their personal Ideal World.

 

While also horrible, this is a different issue, I think. The riders can choose to compete or not; horses don't have the same choice.

 

Ah, but horses do have choices.  Those who don't like their jobs either won't do them or won't do them well.  I've seen horses that don't like competing, trail riding, being lesson horses, jumping, etc.  Racing/eventing are no different.  Many of the horses we got in to work with at the stable of my youth were those that had no interest in racing.  They enjoyed other jobs instead.

 

And for some horses - not many - but some, their best contribution to others on this planet is on a plate.  Just as with some people, mean horses exist.  They're not nice to other horses or people.  No, people didn't necessarily make them that way.  They're born that way.

 

Life is too short to spend it with animals that aren't interested in what's going on.  They need to move on to either a job they like or a job they can fulfill.  (Being a pet is just fine as a job if they can land it somewhere.  There aren't enough pet jobs to go around for all horses though.  With the wrong owner, a pet job is not always ideal either...)

[Haiku]

What an incredibly sad discussion.

[shawthorne44]

.

 

Does anyone think horseracing is good for horses?

Serious question - it never occurred to me that anyone thought it was.

 

I have an ex-bf whose family had racehorses when he was growing up.   He said they didn't even have to load the horses into the trailer.   They knew that trailer met racing, and they would get VERY excited.    They would put the trailer on the truck and open the door to the trailer.  Then they'd walk to the stables, make a certain noise and open the stable.   The noise told the horses it was racing time and they would run straight to the trailer about 50 feet away and load themselves in, when they could just as easily made a run for the wide blue under.   He said the only problem was one time a high ranking horse was unable to get out of its stall for some reason and a lower ranked horse got in the trailer first. 

 

The reason some horses need blinders (those things that keep them from seeing their side-view) is that the horse wants to know that there are other horses racing.  So if in the lead, they will slow down until they can see another horse and then speed up to "make it a real race".   But, sometimes that other horse being already ramped up to max speed, will then win the race. 

 

eta:  I am in the Thinking About It stage of getting a rescue horse.  So, every now and then I read the profiles of rescue horses ready for adoption.   I read several that are former racehorses and the former owners are even willing to continue to pay vet bills of any horse adopted.  They still love the horse, just don't have the space.

 

 

Edited May 22, 2016 by shawthorne44

[livetoread]

I was so traumatized after watching the Ruffian/Foolish Pleasure match as a young, horse-obsessed girl, that I swore I would never watch another horse race live again. Every once in awhile I'm tempted, but then another one has to be euthanized after a big race and I remember. I don't think the way horse racing is currently done is okay. Far too many animals suffer, even if some do live excellent lives.

[poppy]

This is why my personal mortality doesn't stress me out. I got over it long ago when I decided to ride. ;) I'd much rather "live" and die young than grow into old age and have done absolutely nothing. That motto still runs my life.

 

It's not senseless at all. For some of us, it's enjoying life to its fullest doing what we enjoy.

 

Quite honestly, I'm far more "afraid" of a nursing home!

 

 

There are things I would change about horse racing if I were Grand Pumba of the Universe. Not racing 2 year olds would be my first change. If that change alone were put into the sport more horses would have a better life for the same reason we've tried to ban underage gymnasts. We don't start our ponies until they are three years of age, sometimes four.

 

It is a money deal there for sure - it'd mean one more year of horse upkeep before one could start to see if they were interested and capable of their job or not.

 

But last I checked, I wasn't voted into the Grand Pumba position... I'm not ditching the whole sport because of it.

 

 

The worst change was forcing the slaughterhouses to close when in reality there ought to be more of them - spread out - killing fewer per location, but meaning less travel for those headed there. By closing them it caused folks to have to ship to Mexico or Canada. Mexico, in particular, is well known for awful slaughter conditions. It helped those horses a TON by having them have to travel further to get into worse conditions. :cursing:

 

Some folks have a tough time seeing the Real World vs their personal Ideal World.

 

 

Ah, but horses do have choices. Those who don't like their jobs either won't do them or won't do them well. I've seen horses that don't like competing, trail riding, being lesson horses, jumping, etc. Racing/eventing are no different. Many of the horses we got in to work with at the stable of my youth were those that had no interest in racing. They enjoyed other jobs instead.

 

And for some horses - not many - but some, their best contribution to others on this planet is on a plate. Just as with some people, mean horses exist. They're not nice to other horses or people. No, people didn't necessarily make them that way. They're born that way.

 

Life is too short to spend it with animals that aren't interested in what's going on. They need to move on to either a job they like or a job they can fulfill. (Being a pet is just fine as a job if they can land it somewhere. There aren't enough pet jobs to go around for all horses though. With the wrong owner, a pet job is not always ideal either...)

This is probably the saddest thing I've read all are. Owners / corporations send horses to hellsih slaughterhouses but you're more upset with people who made it so that there are fewer slaughterhouses? What? Animals being treated cruelly to increase profits is a bad thing.

 

Horse racing is in the same category. Not all horse racing, not all horse owners.... But really the point of it is to make money. Not 'to let horses live their dream of running'. So a spotlight on those profit seekers - who have a lot of power to make choices that are cruel to the creatures they are responsible for - is not inappropriate .

[Guest]

This is probably the saddest thing I've read all are. Owners / corporations send horses to hellsih slaughterhouses but you're more upset with people who made it so that there are fewer slaughterhouses? What? Animals being treated cruelly to increase profits is a bad thing.

 

Horse racing is in the same category. Not all horse racing, not all horse owners.... But really the point of it is to make money. Not 'to let horses live their dream of running'. So a spotlight on those profit seekers - who have a lot of power to make choices that are cruel to the creatures they are responsible for - is not inappropriate .

I think some of this is going to come down to how one views horses. Are they livestock, or pets? People wanted slaughter houses outlawed here, but that doesn't solve the problem with what then do you do with the horses. I'm not sure what they really thought would happen by closing the regulated US slaughter horses. The horses are still here- there is a massive market of people who like to eat horse meat, so it's not like horse racing is enabling slaughter houses. You would still have the meat market whether you have racing or not. You might simply have a higher demand and higher price- but the slaughter houses aren't going anywhere. As long as there's a demand there will be a supply- it's just a matter of which country is regulating the slaughter house conditions. I know that might sound cold, but it's realistic.

 

ETA- I think the two topics are completely separate issue. Safety in racing is one. Politics over horse meat and slaughter houses is another. They exist independently of the other- this thread is somewhat making it sound like if there was no racing there would be no horse going to slaughter.

Edited May 22, 2016 by texasmom33

[creekland]

This is probably the saddest thing I've read all are. Owners / corporations send horses to hellsih slaughterhouses but you're more upset with people who made it so that there are fewer slaughterhouses? What? Animals being treated cruelly to increase profits is a bad thing.

 

Horse racing is in the same category. Not all horse racing, not all horse owners.... But really the point of it is to make money. Not 'to let horses live their dream of running'. So a spotlight on those profit seekers - who have a lot of power to make choices that are cruel to the creatures they are responsible for - is not inappropriate .

 

Honestly, yes.  If there were more slaughterhouses it would mean less travel for those destined to go there.  Less travel = less suffering.  Slaughterhouses in the US are more highly regulated than those in Mexico.  More regulation also = less suffering.

 

I eat meat.  I respect that humans are omnivores and many of us choose to eat meat.  Then there are other omnivores and carnivores that live on this planet that also eat meat.  In the wild and throughout history horses are/were one of those meat sources.  That's not going to change.  We can force folks to change in this country by not supplying horse meat (even for dog food), but our country is still one of the big sources of meat worldwide - even if folks that think they are meaning well do more harm by causing horses to get shipped to Mexico or Canada first.

 

I know there are some who feel all humans and even domesticated animals should be forced to eat vegetarian - maybe vegan?  I'm not among them.

 

I prefer to see those equines who are not wanted fill the slot for food for others over being euthanized.  Why?  Because if they're euthanized, it doesn't lower the demand for horse meat.  It merely means another was raised to fill their slot.  There's no way I see that as better.  I don't see it as better if a cow fills the slot either.  

 

There are oodles of horses that end up not wanted.  Racing only provides some of them.  The others can come from having horrid personalities, deformities, ailments, premarin production, or not being good at their (non-racing) jobs and not landing a pet job with someone.  Slaughter at least allows these to fill a role on our planet.  Euthanizing them does not.  It requires two horses to die rather than one.

 

Oh... and the point of horse racing is sport.  Very, very few owners make money.  Those who work at it (grooms, jockeys, trainers, etc) try to make money since that's their job, but anyone going into ownership with the thought of making money had better do their research first!  The lottery might have better odds.  Most who want to earn a living off gambling have switched to casinos.

 

The money aspect of racing two year olds comes from wanting to lose less money if the horses aren't good at their jobs.  (Cut losses.)

Edited May 22, 2016 by creekland

[creekland]

I have an ex-bf whose family had racehorses when he was growing up.   He said they didn't even have to load the horses into the trailer.   

 

Many show horses load themselves too.  Many, many equines love their jobs.  I've had some who would grab for their bridle when it was still in my hand - trying to help put it on.  Most absolutely love the attention humans give them - grooming, riding, whatever.  It's why horses can make good pets.  Well, most horses.  There are always some - just as there are some people few want to hang around.

 

As with all industries there are some who are idiots (owners/trainers, etc).  Concentrate on eliminating those rather than thinking everyone is in that club.

[hornblower]

I want to point out that just because an animal appears to willingly or even cheerfully do something that does not make it good thing to do. 

 

You can quite easily train most animals to willingly accept painful procedures (electric shocks for ex) & if you have any decent training skill at all, you can get them to do it eagerly. Screwing up pain & pleasure pathways in the neural circuitry is common. It is not in & of itself evidence that a group of animals enjoys a specific activity though. 
 

[poppy]

Honestly, yes. If there were more slaughterhouses it would mean less travel for those destined to go there. Less travel = less suffering. Slaughterhouses in the US are more highly regulated than those in Mexico. More regulation also = less suffering.

 

I eat meat. I respect that humans are omnivores and many of us choose to eat meat. Then there are other omnivores and carnivores that live on this planet that also eat meat. In the wild and throughout history horses are/were one of those meat sources. That's not going to change. We can force folks to change in this country by not supplying horse meat (even for dog food), but our country is still one of the big sources of meat worldwide - even if folks that think they are meaning well do more harm by causing horses to get shipped to Mexico or Canada first.

 

I know there are some who feel all humans and even domesticated animals should be forced to eat vegetarian - maybe vegan? I'm not among them.

 

I prefer to see those equines who are not wanted fill the slot for food for others over being euthanized. Why? Because if they're euthanized, it doesn't lower the demand for horse meat. It merely means another was raised to fill their slot. There's no way I see that as better. I don't see it as better if a cow fills the slot either.

 

There are oodles of horses that end up not wanted. Racing only provides some of them. The others can come from having horrid personalities, deformities, ailments, premarin production, or not being good at their (non-racing) jobs and not landing a pet job with someone. Slaughter at least allows these to fill a role on our planet. Euthanizing them does not. It requires two horses to die rather than one.

 

Oh... and the point of horse racing is sport. Very, very few owners make money. Those who work at it (grooms, jockeys, trainers, etc) try to make money since that's their job, but anyone going into ownership with the thought of making money had better do their research first! The lottery might have better odds. Most who want to earn a living off gambling have switched to casinos.

 

The money aspect of racing two year olds comes from wanting to lose less money if the horses aren't good at their jobs. (Cut losses.)

I don't think everyone should be vegetarian . My family isn't. I do think choosing to purchase factory farm meat is ethically questionable. I think animal owners who choose to use those Mexican slaughterhouses are even more ethically questionable.

[Haiku]

Animals cannot consent. Horses may enjoying running but not other things that come along with being a racing horse or being the property of someone who makes decisions based on maximizing profits. No being enjoys pain. No being enjoys injury. No being enjoys slaughter.

[hornblower]

And one of the reasons all slaughterhouses are moving & closing is because they cannot get workers to work in them - at least not at the salaries that the corporations are willing to pay (& by extension, not at prices people are willing to pay for the products produced there). 

One of our big plants is staffed with temporary foreign workers from Africa because you cannot pay local people enough to do this job & still make a profit. 

Horse slaughter will I believe become increasingly controversial. It's not quite as badly viewed as dog meat farms but it's right up there for most people.

 From my perspective it's not that a few are wrecking horses (whether that's horse racing or eventing or casual ownership) It's that the whole industry is rotten and a few are trying to do ok in it. It's the rule, not the exception that horses are traded and discarded like used cars or shoes.  They're expensive to care for properly and few people have the money & desire to do it right IMO. 


 

[Haiku]

In fact, that's why I don't particularly support ethical vegetarianism - I think we need to realize that our lives depend on us participating in an ecosystem that includes death.

 

This is an odd interpretation of ethical veganism. I am not a vegan because I wish to avoid death. That has little or nothing to do with it.

[creekland]

I want to point out that just because an animal appears to willingly or even cheerfully do something that does not make it good thing to do. 

 

You can quite easily train most animals to willingly accept painful procedures (electric shocks for ex) & if you have any decent training skill at all, you can get them to do it eagerly. Screwing up pain & pleasure pathways in the neural circuitry is common. It is not in & of itself evidence that a group of animals enjoys a specific activity though. 

 

 

You're really stretching it with this one to get it to equal your beliefs.  ;)

 

How much actual equine experience do you have IRL?

[creekland]

I don't think everyone should be vegetarian . My family isn't. I do think choosing to purchase factory farm meat is ethically questionable. I think animal owners who choose to use those Mexican slaughterhouses are even more ethically questionable.

 

You know what?  I think we agree on these points.

 

I prefer slaughter that is as humane as possible.  We hunt for much of our own meat (deer).  We have our own chickens that don't quite free range (hawks. foxes), but get yard time.  We used to raise our own beef and pigs and used a very local slaughterhouse a mere 5 miles or so from our house.

 

We put down our retirees (ponies, cats, dogs) when their life is over (since I consider "retiree" a job our critters move into after they've done their other jobs).  We have sold many older ponies when they were done with their breeding career, but it was into other jobs - usually packing around young riders - jobs that were easy and they love.

 

We're not 100% polar opposite in our views.

 

We just disagree on some of the other stuff.

[Paula in MS]

While also horrible, this is a different issue, I think. The riders can choose to compete or not; horses don't have the same choice.

 

 

What is killing the eventers is the same thing that is killing the horses....rotational falls.   The worst part is that plenty of the riders are teenagers.  They just have no clue the danger that they are in, but horses are dropping left and right along with the riders.  

[Paula in MS]

This is why my personal mortality doesn't stress me out.  I got over it long ago when I decided to ride.   ;)  I'd much rather "live" and die young than grow into old age and have done absolutely nothing.  That motto still runs my life.

 

It's not senseless at all.  For some of us, it's enjoying life to its fullest doing what we enjoy.

 

 

It's not so much the inherent risk of riding horses.  My daughter rides constantly, and we are at an eventing barn.  The problem for me, is that, at some point, you have to stop pushing the limit on the cross country courses.  You can only jump so high/far and turn so tight.  I just think we might be pushing it too far sometimes.  

 

We have many horses at our barn that were former racehorses.  They have lots of problems, especially the damage done from running in a circle in the same direction all the time.  There has to be a balance.  You can enjoy riding without killing yourself or your horse, barring something unforeseen.  But the number of dead athletes, both human and equine, on the cross country field of late is concerning, not to mention the number of severe injuries.

[Guest]

Animals cannot consent. Horses may enjoying running but not other things that come along with being a racing horse or being the property of someone who makes decisions based on maximizing profits. No being enjoys pain. No being enjoys injury. No being enjoys slaughter.

But with this then, you would have to ban all sporting horse events. There would be no barrel racing, no poles, no show jumping ,nothing because these are in actuality equine athletes. All athletes are are at risk of injury by default. You can't eliminate risk of injury with horses in general. I mean even running around in the pasture, some horses manage to injury themselves- I bet all of us have a story on that. That's what happens when something is designed to carry 1200 lbs on a few very delicate bones. The risk is simply inherent. Yes, you can try and minimize risk by some good rules and equipment and vet checks, but you will never eliminate the risk for the horse or the rider. If you try you might as well eliminate horse ownership as a whole. Very few people can afford, or would choose to afford, lawn art that costs a few thousand dollars a year to maintain.

[Haiku]

But with this then, you would have to ban all sporting horse events. 

 

Yes, you would. I am for banning all sports that rely on animals to turn a buck or earn prestige for humans.

[creekland]

The problem for me, is that, at some point, you have to stop pushing the limit on the cross country courses.  You can only jump so high/far and turn so tight.  I just think we might be pushing it too far sometimes.  

 

I agree with you completely on that.  It's more fun with a hint of danger than too much real danger.

 

We all ride in vehicles of some sort.  That's dangerous.  We don't need to be risking fate by using cell phones while driving in them.

[creekland]

Yes, you would. I am for banning all sports that rely on animals to turn a buck or earn prestige for humans.

 

Make sure you put bans on their existence in the wild too.  It's pretty darn dangerous for prey animals in the wild and the injuries aren't pretty.

[Haiku]

Make sure you put bans on their existence in the wild too.  It's pretty darn dangerous for prey animals in the wild and the injuries aren't pretty.

 

I'm not really sure what you are talking about, but I am not talking about what happens in the wild. I am talking about what humans create to turn a buck, earn prestige, and entertain themselves.

[creekland]

It's always fun to read a thread where people openly state that they want to ban what you do for a living or hobby merely because it doesn't fit their agenda or picture of the world.  It's even more "fun" when you know they probably have very little experience with what they're talking about. 

[Haiku]

It's always fun to read a thread where people openly state that they want to ban what you do for a living or hobby merely because it doesn't fit their agenda or picture of the world.  It's even more "fun" when you know they probably have very little experience with what they're talking about. 

 

Thanks for the snark.

[creekland]

Thanks for the snark.

 

It's definitely not snark.  It's reality.

 

How much equine experience do you have IRL?

[Haiku]

It's definitely not snark.  It's reality.

 

How much equine experience do you have IRL?

 

I grew up with horses and worked for someone who raced them. Those experiences are part of the totality of my beliefs. Beyond that, I am not getting into this with you. We have different beliefs and will never reach common accord on them. I am ok with that.

[hornblower]

You're really stretching it with this one to get it to equal your beliefs.   ;)

 

How much actual equine experience do you have IRL?

 

I wasn't speaking about horses so I don't understand your comment. My comment was generic that you can condition an animal & a human to accept / tolerate /submit to a lot of things. How much experience do you have with classical & operant conditioning of animals? 

 

My dd rode for almost 4 years. I often groomed horses while she rode. So I'd guess I spent about 200-300 h in the stables. Not much experience really.  I don't know much about whales or gorillas or lots of other animals either. So what? 

[hornblower]

Make sure you put bans on their existence in the wild too.  It's pretty darn dangerous for prey animals in the wild and the injuries aren't pretty.

 

I don't understand why people reach for that analogy. Nature is an ugly and cruel $%^*&(. Doesn't mean I have to be. 

[hornblower]

But with this then, you would have to ban all sporting horse events. There would be no barrel racing, no poles, no show jumping ,nothing because these are in actuality equine athletes. All athletes are are at risk of injury by default. You can't eliminate risk of injury with horses in general. I mean even running around in the pasture, some horses manage to injury themselves- I bet all of us have a story on that. That's what happens when something is designed to carry 1200 lbs on a few very delicate bones. The risk is simply inherent. Yes, you can try and minimize risk by some good rules and equipment and vet checks, but you will never eliminate the risk for the horse or the rider. If you try you might as well eliminate horse ownership as a whole. Very few people can afford, or would choose to afford, lawn art that costs a few thousand dollars a year to maintain.

 

I think slowly many sports will change significantly or fizzle out. We don't (legally) dogfight or cockfight anymore. Change happens.

 

 The rodeo protests here are strong. We're getting closer & closer to banning some events - esp chuckwagon which keeps having a pr problem with gruesome deaths right in front of spectators.  

[Guest]

Yes, you would. I am for banning all sports that rely on animals to turn a buck or earn prestige for humans.

I guess I just see different sides of it. I ran barrels for fun. It was still a sport eventhough i didn't compete. I mean all of my sport riding was for enjoyment. I like riding horses, but I like working with horses even more. And I know some might not believe it, but my horses like to work. They wait at the gate the moment they hear my voice. They follow me around the pasture when I'm repairing fencing or anything else. It's not because I feed them- they know what time that is and they still seek out human attention anytime they can get it. I just cannot see depriving kids or adults the joy of riding a horse over the risk that something could injure the horse. If we weren't using them they wouldn't exist, but no one can really ask the horse whether or not be would rather exist and risk injury or never have been. I like to think my horses enjoy their lives. Mine is richer for them- that's for sure.

[Guest]

 

I think slowly many sports will change significantly or fizzle out. We don't (legally) dogfight or cockfight anymore. Change happens.

 

The rodeo protests here are strong. We're getting closer & closer to banning some events - esp chuckwagon which keeps having a pr problem with gruesome deaths right in front of spectators.

It didn't stop the dogfighting or cockfighting though. It simply drove it underground. Both industries are alive and well- at least in TX and FL and I'm guessing elsewhere. I just am not a person who is comfortable with an all or nothing mentality on most things. I think you put some common sense rules in place and have faith in other adults to be at least as smart as the people making the rules. You can't outlaw immoral people- it simply deprives those of us who follow the rules of enjoying something. You punish the many because of the few.

[Haiku]

I just cannot see depriving kids or adults the joy of riding a horse over the risk that something could injure the horse. 

 

I'm not saying that people shouldn't ride horses. My dd loves to ride horses and took and equestrian class where she learned riding technique along with proper care of a horse. I know that horses and people can have amazing relationships. I'm just saying that when you introduce a profit or prestige motive, the welfare of an animal can very quickly take a backseat to other concerns, and it is the animal who ends up suffering.

[Haiku]

This may or may not be tangentially related, but since people brought up human athletes, I'll toss in my $.02. My son is an elite-level goalie. My husband and I have talked many times about what path he should take to reach his goal of playing at the highest level he can and becoming a goalie coach. I know that my son would like to be a professional athlete. When he is an adult, he can make the decision for himself. In the meantime, I will never, ever send my child away to billet with a family and play for some junior team in the hopes that he can earn a spot on a minor-league or NHL team. I have heard way, way, way too many horror stories of the physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of young athletes in situations like that. In profit-driven and high-prestige sports, those who are most vulnerable suffer. My son (while I have care of him) will never be in a position where he is defenseless against those who would use him for their gain. My son will never play injured because "other people are counting on him." As much as I love hockey (and I love hockey), I will not allow my son to be commoditized for someone else's purposes. And I do feel the same way about animals in sports. They are vulnerable and often have no one to speak for their needs and rights.

[hornblower]

I guess I just see different sides of it. I ran barrels for fun. It was still a sport eventhough i didn't compete. I mean all of my sport riding was for enjoyment. I like riding horses, but I like working with horses even more. And I know some might not believe it, but my horses like to work. They wait at the gate the moment they hear my voice. They follow me around the pasture when I'm repairing fencing or anything else. It's not because I feed them- they know what time that is and they still seek out human attention anytime they can get it. I just cannot see depriving kids or adults the joy of riding a horse over the risk that something could injure the horse. If we weren't using them they wouldn't exist, but no one can really ask the horse whether or not be would rather exist and risk injury or never have been. I like to think my horses enjoy their lives. Mine is richer for them- that's for sure.

 

Fwiw, I DO believe you.

 

I know people can have this relationship with animals. I do recreational dog sport (tracking,  agility, obedience)... I do it because it's a fun game to play WITH my dog. I don't compete much (& right now not at all as my guys are elderly). I competed only with the dog that liked to compete. I didn't force my dog that doesn't like to compete to do it.  My dogs LOVE to train.  They  love training sessions, they love when I lay out tracks.  

 

But I also try very hard to be respectful of them. I train using positive methods. If a dog is not performing, we stop. The dog can always quit & I respect that. 

 

And I know in dog sport that's not always the case. There are people who acquire dogs as competition prospects and if they don't pan out, they just get another one & try to rehome or euth a perfectly fine dog who just isn't up to their level. So yeah, it happens in my world as well & I have had to have lots of soul searching about what is right & wrong wrt dogs  (like, is it really rescuing a dog to grab a street or village dog and imprison them in a suburban home?) 

 

I like this manifesto & wrt to competition & dog sport, I really work hard to stay with this point esp: 

 

3) NO Holding selfish or uncompassionate goals for your training.

No intentionally putting an animal at risk for physical or emotional damage to satisfy ones own interests.

 

I don't know. 

 

I do see lots of grey in these issues. But some items are also clearly veering way into black & white... 

 

 

 

[poppy]

It's always fun to read a thread where people openly state that they want to ban what you do for a living or hobby merely because it doesn't fit their agenda or picture of the world. It's even more "fun" when you know they probably have very little experience with what they're talking about.

Other side of the coin is, when this thread started, I kinda thought about abolitionists ... People who pushed for change based on their view of the world and without direct experience being a slaveowner.

 

It's an analogy just about whether it's reasonable to ask moral questions from a distance. Obviously --- human slavery and horseracing are not in the same UNIVERSE, at all -- I am not suggesting suggest a horse owner is like a slave owner . Not even close. It's just, it's what popped into my thread when this thread started and someone said something like 'people who don't even know much horses are going to complain about racing'. I don't need to know about horses to have opinions about people who 'employ ' horses. Just like I don't need a kid in public school to have opinions about school, don't have to work in a fracking office to have an opinion on fracking , etc etc.

[creekland]

Other side of the coin is, when this thread started, I kinda thought about abolitionists ... People who pushed for change based on their view of the world and without direct experience being a slaveowner.

 

It's an analogy just about whether it's reasonable to ask moral questions from a distance. Obviously --- human slavery and horseracing are not in the same UNIVERSE, at all -- I am not suggesting suggest a horse owner is like a slave owner . Not even close. It's just, it's what popped into my thread when this thread started and someone said something like 'people who don't even know much horses are going to complain about racing'. I don't need to know about horses to have opinions about people who 'employ ' horses. Just like I don't need a kid in public school to have opinions about school, don't have to work in a fracking office to have an opinion on fracking , etc etc.

 

It's amazing how much one's opinion can change though when they DO have experience with such things vs when they just think they know what's going on, esp when the only info they get is from the media vs IRL.

 

Media tends to show the worst and ignore the best.

 

But hey, tons of people know all about homeschooling too - how unsocialized our kids are, how they can't possibly know science, etc.  I mean, they don't have to actually know it IRL to have an opinion about it.

 

Such is life.

 

It's important that folks (readers) making opinions consider the source.

 

Disney movies DO NOT show animals correctly.  They are not humans in animal form.  They're their own species with their own thoughts, likes, dislikes, feelings, etc.  It's not difficult to read them once one gets to know them, but if one treats a cat like a horse, it won't go well.  Ditto that by assuming all are human"ish."

 

That said, there's nothing inherently wrong with an animal working for a living either.  We humans do that. On our farm, so do our cats, dogs, and ponies - chickens too actually considering they provide us with food and eat bugs.

 

We raised three boys and I expect they'll earn their own livings later.  We've raised oodles of ponies with the same expectations.  Most have done well!

 

[obsidian]

This is why my personal mortality doesn't stress me out.  I got over it long ago when I decided to ride.   ;)  I'd much rather "live" and die young than grow into old age and have done absolutely nothing.  That motto still runs my life.

 

It's not senseless at all.  For some of us, it's enjoying life to its fullest doing what we enjoy.

 

Quite honestly, I'm far more "afraid" of a nursing home!

:iagree: Related to the recent eventing deaths, this is a pretty good take on things.

Ah, but horses do have choices.  Those who don't like their jobs either won't do them or won't do them well.  I've seen horses that don't like competing, trail riding, being lesson horses, jumping, etc.  Racing/eventing are no different.  Many of the horses we got in to work with at the stable of my youth were those that had no interest in racing.  They enjoyed other jobs instead.

No, horses don't really have a choice. They can make their opinions known, sure, but at the end of the day, they aren't the ones deciding to enter a race, or to take drugs, and so on. Ideally, their owners take the horse's preference into account and find the horse a job they enjoy, but realistically that doesn't always happen.

[obsidian]

What is killing the eventers is the same thing that is killing the horses....rotational falls.   The worst part is that plenty of the riders are teenagers.  They just have no clue the danger that they are in, but horses are dropping left and right along with the riders.

  

I'm not sure it's accurate to say riders are unaware of the dangers. Fatal accidents generally occur at an international level, and you'd have to be pretty naive not to know the risks of competition by the time you reach that level. I agree that rotational falls are a serious issue.

 

It's not so much the inherent risk of riding horses.  My daughter rides constantly, and we are at an eventing barn.  The problem for me, is that, at some point, you have to stop pushing the limit on the cross country courses.  You can only jump so high/far and turn so tight.  I just think we might be pushing it too far sometimes.  

 

We have many horses at our barn that were former racehorses.  They have lots of problems, especially the damage done from running in a circle in the same direction all the time.  There has to be a balance.  You can enjoy riding without killing yourself or your horse, barring something unforeseen.  But the number of dead athletes, both human and equine, on the cross country field of late is concerning, not to mention the number of severe injuries.

I agree that sometimes the limit is pushed too far on cross country courses. Also, though, cross country is dangerous by its nature, people are working to make it safer, and it is safer than it used to be. Obviously it's not yet enough, but I also don't think people are doing nothing. This is a thoughtful article on safety, and these two articles delineate reasonable solutions to make the sport safer (1, 2).

Edited May 23, 2016 by STEM

[Paula in MS]

  

I'm not sure it's accurate to say riders are unaware of the dangers. Fatal accidents generally occur at an international level, and you'd have to be pretty naive not to know the risks of competition by the time you reach that level. I agree that rotational falls are a serious issue.

 

I agree that sometimes the limit is pushed too far on cross country courses. Also, though, cross country is dangerous by its nature, people are working to make it safer, and it is safer than it used to be. Obviously it's not yet enough, but I also don't think people are doing nothing. This is a thoughtful article on safety, and these two articles delineate reasonable solutions to make the sport safer (1, 2).

 

I think they know that accidents happen, but young riders in particular, are still at the stage where they think it won't happen to them.   They think they are invincible.  There are plenty of young people at the CCI* level.  With the right horse, it doesn't take that long to get there. 

 

What bothers me most is when cross country people just shrug and say, "Oh, well."  Someone dies and the event continues like it's no big deal.  "She died doing what she loves."  Seriously?  I'm pretty sure she would prefer to still be riding.  :(  

[obsidian]

I think they know that accidents happen, but young riders in particular, are still at the stage where they think it won't happen to them.   They think they are invincible.  There are plenty of young people at the CCI* level.  With the right horse, it doesn't take that long to get there. 

 

What bothers me most is when cross country people just shrug and say, "Oh, well."  Someone dies and the event continues like it's no big deal.  "She died doing what she loves."  Seriously?  I'm pretty sure she would prefer to still be riding.   :(

 

On one hand, I don't know that anyone ever seriously thinks it will happen to them. You don't start out a cross country course thinking you're going to die on it, kwim? On the other hand, I think just about everyone knows it's a possibility in the abstract. 

 

That sort of attitude would bother me as well. I haven't seen it at my barn, and the latest accident has been felt pretty deeply, as a lot of people competed with Philippa or knew her. I do think some people take comfort in knowing she was doing what she loved; it's something of a coping mechanism. But I don't think anyone isn't grieved by her death. All the statements I've seen from people at the event - Boyd Martin, Philipp Dutton and the like -- were obviously heartbroken. From reports I read, the decision to continue the competition wasn't made lightly, either. & I know the events where Olivia and Caitlyn had accidents were cancelled.

[Tsuga]

But with this then, you would have to ban all sporting horse events. There would be no barrel racing, no poles, no show jumping ,nothing because these are in actuality equine athletes. All athletes are are at risk of injury by default. You can't eliminate risk of injury with horses in general. I mean even running around in the pasture, some horses manage to injury themselves- I bet all of us have a story on that. That's what happens when something is designed to carry 1200 lbs on a few very delicate bones. The risk is simply inherent. Yes, you can try and minimize risk by some good rules and equipment and vet checks, but you will never eliminate the risk for the horse or the rider. If you try you might as well eliminate horse ownership as a whole. Very few people can afford, or would choose to afford, lawn art that costs a few thousand dollars a year to maintain.

 

Quite frankly, I see more and more parallels with the NFL in this discussion.

 

When people have no other means to feed their families or to achieve social status--basic respect--in a society, than sport, when there is no basic minimum level of income for a 40 or even 60 hour week, then "consent" in sport becomes quite a nebulous concept.

 

I think at this level when we are talking about horses having choices--and I'm responding to thread and not you in particular texasmom33--we really need to know what we are talking about when we talk about choices.

 

Do I have a real choice to stay at home, given my ethic and how I was raised and how much it would cost society and the benefits I'd need and the fact that I already got benefits in a sense when I got a degree on a fellowship? I mean what does "choice" mean in that sense?

 

How does the sporting horse, or the pet dog, or the trained athlete, or the woman who believes that heaven is earned in one way only, through obedient wifehood--how do these beings make choices, per se?

 

Pretending that humans all have choices and that animals don't, I believe obscures a greater powerlessness that all animals, including humans, face.

 

A lot of what we people do, and what monkeys do, and what cats and dogs and horses do, involve trained behaviors that we do not consciously choose, and trade offs in terms of pleasure and pain.

 

And we'll all be meat at some point. Either a carnivore eats us or the ground bacteria consume us. We'll all be consumed. We all hurt when we die.

 

It is a big reason I'm willing to eat meat.

 

I'm not willing to torture meat. But it hurts to die most of the time... can't really get around that. And we ALL work for a living except pets and children. Eating grass, running from prey... I don't see the racehorse life of a well cared for horse as anything especially problematic.

 

The drugs bother me.

 

But as I have posted in many places, drugging any animal, human or not, for performance (rather than to avoid pain or in the case of adults, to experience a different type of pleasure) I find deeply problematic.

[eternalsummer]

We don't eat factory farmed animal products, ever, in any situation (except maybe life or death, but that hasn't come up).  I don't know that a pig, treated about as badly as you can be treated in factory farming, is significantly less intelligent than a dog or horse.

 

Death is a different thing; we've been eating animals since we figured out how (we being humans) and that makes sense to me as part of the food chain.

 

Torture/suffering is another, especially when it is done not for something needed, but for cheaper and more meat that we *don't* need.

 

As far as racehorses go, I think it's important to be absolutely clear about what you are doing: using an animal for either personal gain ($) or personal pleasure.  I don't think people are breeding horses for the horse's sake - in that case they'd just feed them and protect them from wolves and let them run wild in the hills.  Some horses may like one activity more than another, or may seem to really enjoy an activity - but it is not something the horse is choosing.  If you left it to develop naturally, with other horses, it would choose to just run around and be a horse and have horse babies and etc.

 

Pets are similar: you can train a dog or cat into a dependent relationship with humans, and that may or may not be good for the dog or cat in some ways, but it is not something the dog or cat is necessarily choosing - if you just leave them alone and feed them, they'll generally go make lots of cat babies and live half-feral in your backyard.

 

Also, while there are some parallels between human lack of choice and animal lack of choice, in this society, there is a distinct difference.  You cannot legally sell someone to a slaughterhouse.  Ever.  You cannot legally euthanize someone (without their express consent), and you cannot use them for labor, etc. etc.  It may seem like some people's choices are more limited than others', and certainly that is the case, either by structure or by natural ability and inclination; however, slavery and murder are illegal.

 

For animals, you can do any of the above, any time, for any reason.  (barring some forms of animal torture, of some animals).

 

 

I suppose there are some people who oppose horse racing and also never (ever) eat factory farmed bacon, but I don't know a single one of them, unfortunately.  I can't even persuade anyone I know to quit the factory farmed bacon.

[creekland]

What bothers me most is when cross country people just shrug and say, "Oh, well."  Someone dies and the event continues like it's no big deal.  "She died doing what she loves."  Seriously?  I'm pretty sure she would prefer to still be riding.   :(

 

If/when I die I sure hope people don't stop living or stop doing what they love because it killed me (if that was the cause)!  

 

It's one thing to grieve the loss of companionship, but totally another to stop living.

 

May the competition continue!!!

 

Having dealt with a potentially life threatening condition over the past two-three years, the one thing I've made clear to my guys - spelled it out to them more than once - is keep living your life.  It's what mama wants most!

 

I'd rather have died riding than never have ridden.  I'd rather have died than been paralyzed or similarly permanently affected.

 

When we were going to HI and planning a helicopter trip over Kauai a friend asked me how I could want to do that.  There had been a crash that had killed a family in her neighborhood (she lives near me).  It's too dangerous, she said!  

 

A)  It's not really dangerous by odds.

 

B)  I'd rather have tried it and died than stayed on the ground and missed the gorgeousness of it all.

 

Who cares if one lives to be 100 if they never do anything?

 

-----

 

Otherwise, with "choice" and all the arguments, it really does make me see the parallels with those who feel homeschooling should be outlawed - esp since our kids have no choice, or even if they do, they're too young to know what they are choosing.  There are so many (bad) reports about homeschoolers on TV and from other reports, that ruining our kids ought to be outlawed!  They need to be in public schools so they can grow up properly the way it's meant to be with professionals teaching them.  Yes, there might be bullying and other unpleasant things at public school, but that's just natural selection in action - very akin to wild horses that survive (or not) in the wild.  (Never mind that horses aren't really a wild species and there were no wild horses in North American prior to the Europeans coming...)

 

Why even guide our kids into jobs?  Given their freedom, most would be happy to be lounging around all day in the sun - making babies.  We should just be providing them with food and love.   :lol:

[hornblower]

 

 

I suppose there are some people who oppose horse racing and also never (ever) eat factory farmed bacon, but I don't know a single one of them, unfortunately.  I can't even persuade anyone I know to quit the factory farmed bacon.

 

 

There are plenty of vegetarians and vegans in the world (& growing quickly. 360% growth in vegans in the UK in 10 years.) who don't eat any bacon at all.  

 

But it's true there are also people outspoken and passionate about animal welfare issues who have not yet made the connection to their own diets and consumption. It's a process....

 

 

 

 

 

[poppy]

There are plenty of vegetarians and vegans in the world (& growing quickly. 360% growth in vegans in the UK in 10 years.) who don't eat any bacon at all.  

 

But it's true there are also people outspoken and passionate about animal welfare issues who have not yet made the connection to their own diets and consumption. It's a process....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Certified Humane bacon is very easy to get in my region.    But,   I know that isn't true everywhere.  My mom's town has WalMart as the main grocery store and they don't carry anything but factory farmed  meat.  But hey, 5 years ago, you couldn't get organic fruits and veggies at Walmart, and now I think it's much much easier.  Change is happening, and faster than you might think. 

 

I also love that Costco has Pete & Gerry's eggs now. 

 

Lots of labels don't mean anything (all natural, etc) but I am a fan of Certified Humane if you are grocery store shopping.

Local is best but not always practical.

Edited May 23, 2016 by poppy

[Bluegoat]

I can only speak for myself here- but horse racing for my family was never about money. That is basically the joke of all of it. We never made any off of it. We LOST money I'm sure if I was to go back and call my dad. The free horse comment up thread was very true. I'm not sure it was about ego or entertainment for us either. It was something we LOVED.  I was born loving horses, but my Dad really nurtured that love into something more. He taught me how to care for them, how to watch the personalities, how to gauge how a horse was going to run that day simply by its attitude in the morning. He taught me how to pick a horse at auction, how to give shots, how to deal with colic, all sorts of things. We took care of our animals. We cherished our animals. It was quite simply, a love affair with the sport. He still loves it- but as with anything there is a lot of other things beyond the horses within it and after a while you get tired. That doesn't take away the love of it though. 

 

I think if you strip the humanity out of anything it's easy to take a clinical look at it and decry it all as evil. But it's not. It's not that black and white. Watching something you pick out at an auction and nurture and train and spend day after day with, dealing with trainers, dealing with jockeys and barns and everything else, then run its heart out and win (or even finish well), is a feeling I can't quite capture here in words. It would sound too cheesy. And no, you definitely don't always have winners, and that is part of the risk. But horse racing, for true lovers of the horses, it's not easily summed up like that- anymore than any other sport involving people or animals. Everything that seems to involve people, at some point has a seedy side. And yes, things to help protect the parties involved are sometimes necessary. But I really hate to see an entire sport pushed aside because there are some immoral people involved. Name a sport that isn't, whether it involves people or animals? I don't really see how it's any different than a breeder of show dogs, or sport dogs or anything else. Does that mean we shouldn't own dogs anymore, because someone will do something bad? 

 

I don't think it's any different than breeding show dogs, and the dog show circuit is a major reason I avoid most pure-bred dogs and even those who I consider to be well-intentioned breeders.  I can own a dog, even a useful one, without giving my money to a structure that ultimately depends on the people at the top being involved in really morally questionable activities.

 

I'd say the same about entertainment sports for humans, though at least there the individuals have some say in hurting themselves in order to compete.

 

I know people that are involved in horse sports and its fine - they are ethical about it.  The bigger their operation though, and the higher the level, the less I see that.  And yes, it costs significant amounts of money, which is why they are as business-like about it as any other low-margin business - a non-performer or a young horse that shows it isn't going to be useful, which means quite a lot of them - if they can sell it as a pet they might, but that isn't always easy, and they certainly aren't going to sit around paying for the animal to eat if there is no such buyer.  That even seems to be the case in the lower-pressure horse sports.  It's the hobbyists that are most often the ones who treat the animals like pets with a job, people who have another primary source of income.  But it isn't the hobbyists that go to the top, it's the people who are willing to dope their animals or cull the non-performers.  And that determines what the culture will be like at the professional level.

 

  It's exactly why your local amateur track for kids meet probably doesn't have huge issues with doping or illegal drugs, but it become more and more prevalent when you get people looking to get scholarships or make professional teams, and for many sports almost endemic once you get into the highest levels of competition.

[Bluegoat]

In my opinion, you grossly underestimate the amount of coercion, dishonestly and manipulation that can occur in pro sports and competitive sports, in which trainers and other people that handle athletes are paid to make those athletes perform--and athletes are under contract and cannot easily get out of them. Some of those athletes have no other means to support themselves.

 

I would not say that people are in the same position as horses, but I do think that what is going on in the NFL with concussions is a perfect example of how people with power can abuse others for sport, while at the same time claiming to do a lot for the athletes.

 

Another example is the East German government's treatment of its women swimmers. I saw a documentary--it was heartbreaking. To this DAY some of those women are in denial, but 100% of them said, "We were told it was vitamins. We were told it was Soviet and German engineering and science improving nutrition, and to us at the time, it seemed plausible. We knew our bodies were changing but we were told it was our scientifically designed routines."

 

So sad. :(

 

I'm not saying that all or even most athletes don't know, but I do think that what I have heard is that human doping is not like "some idiot athlete wants to ruin his joints" or "screw up his systems with drugs".

 

I find it concerning that you can't get worked up about it. I know many people whose calling in life is athletics. They are living in a world in which performing without drugs is increasingly difficult. It's not a simple choice for them. They can't just say, 'No prob, I'll just do accounting. I'm also good at that!' Like this is THEIR THING. They aren't nearly as good at anything else, and one guy I know just barely made it through high school. True, he could have used more support but the point is he was never going to be a teacher, or an accountant. But he is a fantastic athlete. National level.

 

If you had extended your quote to my second short paragraph, I think I said I had more sympathy for those who feel trapped.  And that is especially so for those who have been under pressure since they were kids - it's harder for them to see another way to do things.

 

That being said - only to a point.  It is possible, when you see that something is either immoral or not what you want, to make another choice.  Maybe you have to go on the dole, and retrain, it isn't necessarily going to be easy, but it is a choice people have and animals being used for entertainment simply do not.

 

I do think that pushing kids hard to get ahead in sports, or even having them get to caught up in it,  is something that I have qualms about because even if they do well, it can lead to that kind of situation where that is where they have directed their energy and their other options don't seem great.

 

It sucks for people who would like to compete as amateurs that they cannot if they don't want to be involved in drugs or other problems.  I don't really think that there is really any reason that people need to be able to make a living from competing in sport.  I think the professionalization of amateur sport has actually been a bad thing overall, and made events like the Olympics increasingly the opposite of what they were meant to be - first they became a venue for nationalism rather than a way to bring people together, now they are mainly about corporatism.

 

TBH, I think at this point, that people who are really committed to the idea of sport would be better off to opt out of that.

 

Nevertheless - if someone injects himself with steroids, or trains in such a way that he can has difficulty walking by the time he is 40, he has made a decision about what he wants.  I don't think I need to be second-guessing that.

[Bluegoat]

It's not so much the inherent risk of riding horses.  My daughter rides constantly, and we are at an eventing barn.  The problem for me, is that, at some point, you have to stop pushing the limit on the cross country courses.  You can only jump so high/far and turn so tight.  I just think we might be pushing it too far sometimes.  

 

We have many horses at our barn that were former racehorses.  They have lots of problems, especially the damage done from running in a circle in the same direction all the time.  There has to be a balance.  You can enjoy riding without killing yourself or your horse, barring something unforeseen.  But the number of dead athletes, both human and equine, on the cross country field of late is concerning, not to mention the number of severe injuries.

 

Yes - this is a problem with sport generally.  It isn't about people having fun competing.  It is about always doing bigger and better, pushing as hard as you can, breaking the record.  That becomes the point - how competitive can you be?  How much farther can you go?  What level can you get to?

 

In a lot of ways, at higher levels it starts to look like obsessional behavior. 

 

A lot depends on available money.  If there is limited funds, people (and animals) tend to be limited to fairly local competition, they tend to have to have other jobs or sources of income, and so on.  There are still winners and losers, but the pressure is just limited, the goal remains more firmly on the sport itself.

 

As soon as countries see sport as a way to push nationalism and begin funding people to train full time, or corporate interests see it as a way to boost sales and so put money into events or training, the stakes become much higher.

[Bluegoat]

This is an odd interpretation of ethical veganism. I am not a vegan because I wish to avoid death. That has little or nothing to do with it.

 

Perhaps, I obviously can't speak to your personal views since I don't know them. I can only speak to the arguments I have heard made in its favour and my own thoughts.

 

But my point isn't necessarily what people intend - people can and often do intend something in one way without it reflecting what actually happens, or with the intent of sticking to certain principles but not realizing that it overlooks other issues or facts. 

 

 

IME ethical vegetarians wish to avoid causing death, being implicated in it.  I think that is, in fact, impossible.  Not just in a "no one quite achieves perfection but we can still try" kind of way, but more fundamentally. We are all mortal, our life requires death, the functioning of the ecosystem we belong to requires death.  Perhaps we don't ourselves, eat meat, but we all depend on the total function of the ecosystem which means not only things dying of old age (which may be the least nice kind in many cases) but violent death.   We all live off death.

 

I think we need to acknowledge that, and participate in it, honestly and consciously, seeing ourselves clearly.  Avoidance of causing death of animals directly amounts to ritual cleanliness, and allows us to more easily avoid understanding our place in nature.  It become a  way of looking at nature from the outside rather than existing within it.

 

Practically I think it leads to a lot of sloppy thinking too, although not always, and often it ends up being anti-life in a scary way.  If personal responsibility for death isn't the real fear, if it is a feeling that death is bad or bad under certain circumstances, where does that lead.  Lets say we get rid of all livestock production and instead, what isn't required for farming vegetation, we turn into more natural ecosystems.  They too will contain animal life - but will their deaths not also be negative?  Can we now claim that because we did not direct their way of coming to be, we have no responsibility for their deaths? (Can we say the same of human suffering that is far away and not caused by us?)  Death in nature is just as brutal, often more so, than properly run livestock slaughter, and the animals lives are as short. 

 

The only way to end suffering is to prevent life.  I don't consider that to be a solution for people, domestic animals, or wild ones.  And I don't consider ritual cleanliness to be anything but an illusion.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Bluegoat