What do you think of this situation? (Details inside)
Asked by
AshlynM (
10684
)
November 20th, 2012
Apparently, there is this story in my town in Nevada where this woman is keeping 2 grown horses in her backyard not zoned for horses. She’s been doing this since this past October.
These horses are in extremely poor health and starving to death. She’s been cited 3 times by animal control. If this is still going on, why didn’t animal control take them away the first or second visit, especially since her backyard wasn’t zoned for them ? The cty has given her a deadline to remove the horses or else they will get a court order. Why don’t they just get a court order right away? She’s had at least a month and 3 visits from animal control to do something.
It may sound like I’m ranting, but I’d honestly like answers to these questions so I can understand this story better.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
7 Answers
Taking care of horses is a hell of a lot of work.
Some people love the idea of having horses, but don’t realize the labor of it.
You are right. The Animal Control people should have taken them on the second visit.
I have a friend who has cared for horses that were poorly housed in the past. It is a labor of love.
Sadly animal control does not intervene in time in many cases.
Warnings and other citations are lax.
I reported a starving draft horse in a field a few years ago and it ended up going down and dying before any intervention occurred. I sure hope this isn’t the case for these horses.
I have had horses, or been involved with them for much of my life and there is NO excuse for the shameful and inhumane situations that often occur with novice owners that have zero concept of what is really involved in owning a horse.
If you can’t afford hay and vetting your horses you find homes for them.
A horse can’t be given a can of fucking tuna like a cat. You simply DO NOT EVER run out of feed!
People vote, horses don’t.
You need to get involved with animal control, perhaps on a volunteer basis and then see if you can get them to act on it. It is always a case of not enough money to do their job correctly.
Unfortunately, for the animals, unless the conditions pose a threat of imminent death, I think the authorities try to give people a chance to make other arrangements for their animals. I think they try to find some kind of compromise between immediately seizing a person’s animals, animals they may be very attached to, and the welfare of the animal. I think, if they err, it should be on the side of the animal’s welfare, but sadly, that is not always the case. Animals are considered property in this country, not “animal beings.” The authorities are sometimes very cautious about seizing someone’s personal property.
Response moderated (Spam)
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
