Conference noted::equitation

    Can you post the letter?
    

�       <<< Note 1915.1 by STUDIO::BIGELOW "PAINTS; color your corral" >>>

�    Can you post the letter?
    
When I get home tonight, sure (which means a) I remember :) and b) this 
weekend sometime since I'm sure the magazine by the PC will remind me)

It's pretty short so this shouldn't be a problem...

Included without permission from the July/August 1994 Hunter & Sport Horse

"Protecting Horses

Recently I came across some information regardig horses that was truly 
horrifying.  I've sent a brochure along with this letter to altert your 
magazine and so you can be more information.  I'm hoping that after reading 
the brochure, you will feel oblilgated to altert other horse people, and 
write about it in your magazine.  This type of cruelty has got to stop!  
More brochurs can be obtained by writing to PETA [People for the Ethical 
Treatment Of Animals]--- the address is on the back of the brochure.  
[Also], I am a subscriber to H&SH and I love your magazine!

---Elise Foxton, Tacoma, WA

Laura:  Elise's brochure contained very distressing information about a 
drug which is obtained from the urine of pregnant mares.  To contact PETA, 
write: P.O. Box 42516, Washington, DC 20015.  Their phone number is 
301-770-PETA.

Also, in the September 1994 issue of Horse Illustrated there is an 
advertisement by Friends of Animals with the heading "This Pill Is Strong 
Enought To Kill 75,000 Horses", a picture of a Premarin pill and a brief 
write up of how the mares are kept and what happens to the foals.  

These types of organizations frequently bill themselves as "animal rights"
organizations rather than "animal welfare" organizations where where animal
welfare is generally concerned with the humane treatment and care of
animals and animal rights believe that animals have individual rights. 

I also own and show dogs and have heard of many horrifying incidents with 
individuals representing animal rights.  At dog shows, dogs were released 
from their crates since it was perceived that crating dogs was inhumane.  
When handlers and owners started locking their dogs in their crates to 
prevent the release, anti-freeze was poured in their water (one dog did die 
from consuming the anti-freeze).  (I don't crate my dog any longer because 
I am terrified of what would happen to her if I left her unattended.)

To be fair, PETA or any other formal organization was not associated with 
the above.  But, they espouse the same animal rights beliefs.  

Animals rights organizations have been active in the Colorado area pushing
for legislation restricting dog and cat breeding.  While I do admit that 
pet overpopulation is a problem, restricting breeding isn't the answer 
particularily if the long term goal is the reduction and elimination of 
pets.

I fear similar issues in the horse world.  Animal rights groups were not
happy with what they saw of the x-country event in Spain at the Olympics.
It's very easy to include a single picture of a horse stranded on the top
of a jump and portray jumping as an inhumane event. 

Maybe the treatment of these mares is inhumane.  However, the article in 
Equus was enough to raise doubts in my mind that things are actually as bad 
as portrayed alone by PETA and FOA nor to be as good as that portrayed by 
the PMU (pregnant mare urine) farmers.

I'd like to see more balanced reporting by the magazines if they are going
to provide contact information or accept ads from organizations claiming to
have equine rights at heart.  I feel that too many people are swayed by a
picture and headline and may not realize that they should research *any*
organization to understand all objectives and goals of the organization and
make sure the contributor isn't contributing to a goal they may not agree
with. 

    My personal practice is to avoid groups with a political agenda even
    when they take up a cuase with which I agree. 
    
    In the past, I have contributed to other organizations but, when they
    started sending their newsletters, I found that a) they supported
    *many* other causes with which I didn't agree, b) refused to tell me
    *exactly* what sorts of legislation they did support, c) provided no
    voice (in terms of what they supported/attacked) to the contributors.
    
    That's why I do not contribute to PETA, PAWS(Progressive Animal Welfare
    Society), HSUS(Humane Society of U.S.), etc. None of them would give me
    an accounting of what they were doing with my money. Therefore, they
    don't get any of it.
    
    I do contribute to ASPCA(which simply runs shelters and
    education/publicity campaigns), Thoroughbred Retirement Fund, several
    research funds(e.g. those working to make the Atlanta Olympics
    *safer* for the horses competing in it and the Grayson-Jockey Club
    Research fund which funds general health research as well as research
    to making racing safer for horses). I also contribute to local non-kill
    pet shelters and I work as a breed representative for a local dog 
    rescue group. 

    John,
    
    The Grayson Research (?) organization that you mentioned in your reply
    caught my attention.  I did not realize that there was an organization
    out there with the idea of making racing safer for the horses on their
    agenda.  It's something I have a personal interest in, however, and 
    I'd like to look into the organization a bit more.  Would you mind
    posting the contact information? 
    
    I am not able to contribute as much as I'd like, but I do try to give
    at least something yearly to the NH Equine Humane Assoc (through which
    I recently adopted a formerly neglected Welsh pony as a companion for
    my mare).   I've always steered well clear of PETA and other extremest
    groups.  Actually, I find it hard to believe that anyone would
    contribute to any organization they have not researched enough to know
    whether or not they agree with!  
    
    As far as whether or not a magazine should publish contact info for
    various organizations, well, I feel the same way about that as I do
    television censorship....if you don't like it, switch the channel, or  
    cancel your subscription.  Would PETA or any other organization have
    grounds for suit if the magazine refused to print their contact info
    while also printing the same info for other (perhaps non-contraversial)
    groups?  Just a thought that could perhaps explain their decision to
    go ahead with it.
    

    See Note 1538.1 for more info on Grayson-Jockey Club Research
    Foundation. One of the studies they funded researched Exercise-Induced
    Pulmonary Hemorrhage(EIPH) or "bleeding" which is something that
    happens primarily to racehorses. The researchers now believe that a
    chance in platelet flow through the lungs is what causes "bleeding" and
    are looking into how that can be prevented. 
    
    I think there are also ongoing studies looking into injuries vs track
    composition/conditions, diagnosing conditions before the horse gets 
    injured in a race etc.

�              <<< Note 1915.6 by CSLALL::LCOBURN "Plan B Farm" >>>

�    As far as whether or not a magazine should publish contact info for
�    various organizations, well, I feel the same way about that as I do
�    television censorship....if you don't like it, switch the channel, or  
�    cancel your subscription.  Would PETA or any other organization have

Good point :) (which I had thought of, or at least express my views to the 
magazine.  Sounds like I need to sharpen my pencil on this tonight.)

�    grounds for suit if the magazine refused to print their contact info
�    while also printing the same info for other (perhaps non-contraversial)
�    groups?  Just a thought that could perhaps explain their decision to
�    go ahead with it.
    
In this case, I don't think PETA would have a leg to stand on.  I don't
believe that PETA asked to have their contact information mentioned in the
letters to the editor section (at least I didn't get that impression). 
And, the magazine (IMO) can also perform censorship of its own.  I don't
believe that a potential advertiser can force a magazine to run their ads. 

Many magazines won't claim to do research into the reputability of a 
company but they can refuse an ad (I seem to recall some of the PC 
(personal computer, not politically correct :) magazines stating that they 
would not run ads for BBSs which may be of objectionable taste :).

Sounds like a letter to H&SH is in order just to see what happens.

    I have found that when I look closely enough at these animal rights
    groups, that there is more to them that meets the eye.
    
    Since PETA is one of those groups that wanted horses in heated barns in
    the winter....I tend not to support them or others like them.
    
    Since, like someone else mentioned, the information was in a letters to
    the editor section, I doubt PETA was behind it.  If however, I saw them
    advertising in an equine magazine, I'd probably cancel that subscription
    wondering what the publishers agenda was. 
     

�       <<< Note 1915.9 by STUDIO::BIGELOW "PAINTS; color your corral" >>>

�    the editor section, I doubt PETA was behind it.  If however, I saw them
�    advertising in an equine magazine, I'd probably cancel that subscription
�    wondering what the publishers agenda was. 
     
I still kinda wondered at the publisher's agenda since a publisher/editor 
certainly doesn't have to publish letters they receive :)

Hadn't heard the heated barn story yet...

Also heard this weekend (personally unverified and unsubstantiated) that
PETA was seen at some dog shows (mid-west?) video-taping.  Turns out they
put together a nice 2 hour tape of handlers correcting their dogs :(  
Definitely taken out of context or viewed by a neophyte, corrections could 
seem mean or harsh but rarely are either.

Sounds like the AKC is spending a fair amount of time trying to perform
damage control from these types of activities.

    A few years back PETA was behind nixing the family farm.  They wanted
    to regulate the temperatures in the barns (ie heat and AC) make sure
    no animals were confined etc...the usual stuff, however I don't
    remember the exact wording of the bill....but we'd have all lost 
    our animals if it passed.
    
    re: dog show
    
    I can just imagine what the tape looks like.  I'm at the point of
    dealing with the disobediant stage in my 7 month old GSD.  Beasue he's
    so large the obediance trainer instructed me on a method of correction
    that may seem cruel, but it works (and actually it's not cruel, I'm
    small and he's quite large!).  

    
    Begin Editorial:
    
    Some folk appear to have a pathological need to be on a moral crusade.
    Unfortunately the world appears to be running short of suitable
    unadultered "sieze the high ground" political and moral causes.
    Socialist Workers' Paradises have collapsed.  Evangelist are found to
    be sinning with the best of them. Churchmen are molesting children.
    Pro-Life advocates are killing people.
    
    What are people whose need to control is out of control to do? How can
    "Rent-a-Mob" (the protesting classes) justify its/their existence?
    Invent a few more causes to be championed, at no cost to themselves, of
    course. Note that where involvement rather than protest is possible, as
    with serious social causes such as the homeless, drug abuse, etc:,
    these folk are conspicuously absent.
    
    End Editorial
    
    Now with regard to the collection of pregnant mares' urine for the
    pharmaceutical industry, there is another by-product and I have one. My
    horse was foaled on a Canadian urine farm. Whatever deprivation he may
    have suffered in "foalhood" there appears to be no long lasting effects
    and he has been spoiled rotten for the last sixteen years.

�        <<< Note 1915.12 by A1VAX::GUNN "I couldn't possibly comment" >>>
�                           -< Saving the World.... >-

�    Now with regard to the collection of pregnant mares' urine for the
�    pharmaceutical industry, there is another by-product and I have one. My
�    horse was foaled on a Canadian urine farm. Whatever deprivation he may
�    have suffered in "foalhood" there appears to be no long lasting effects
�    and he has been spoiled rotten for the last sixteen years.

This is great to hear... that not all 75,000 by-products are sent to the 
slaughterhouse.  And, if he's been spoiled rotten for 16 years, sounds like 
how he came into this world wasn't a problem. :)

re: .11
>>    remember the exact wording of the bill....but we'd have all lost 
>>    our animals if it passed.

    Now your-all catching on.  Animal rights activits believe that literally.
    Owning a pet, racing, rodeo, hunting, the US Navy using dolphins
    are all the same to these people.

    Political divide & conquer.

re:   Dog shows.

    Rodeo's, slaughter houses, XC event at the last Olympics.
    Hatchet jobs with a camera are easy, generate sympathy and then money.

    I think it was last year some group tried to pass regulations on the
    horse drawn carriages in Boston.  I can't remember all the silly details
    (Like horses MUST BE reshod every 6 weeks, during breaks (on a city
    street!) harnesses must be removed...)

re:  "the humane society".  I think John D said it in passing, that there are 
     two very different groups commonly refered to as the humane society.

    Bill