A cold day in hell before they take our horses - NYC carriage press conference

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=jetsmom;7902241]
Good post.[/QUOTE]

I disagree in a fundamental way.

Where is any compromise to ban all animal use by humans?

There is NO compromise with animal rights extremists, no middle ground.

There are no two extremes at all, there is what all humans do, use the natural, renewable resource animals are for us and have been for millennia and then the handful of those with their own strange ideology of a different world than we live in, one where humans live in bubbles or, as one animal rights extremist poster here told us, where there are no humans in the world so no animal would be enslaved.

Many in animal agriculture have been lulled to think there would be something they could do to, in the case of laws and regulations, so animal rights extremists would agree to this or that change.
They agreed in many meetings, then when it came to a bill, it was all over, there was no compromise, those in agriculture felt lied to.

As for the diversion into the slaughter topic, all I will say is that those that are against slaughter are following animal rights extremist propaganda.
Why is that so?
Because slaughter is, again, one more way we use the natural, renewable resource animals are in our world and some horses may fit that process.
The slaughter process is inherently not good or bad, is extremely regulated and inspected.

Animal rights extremists have made slaughter one of their causes of the moment with their abuse card.

I don’t know any one professional in animal agriculture and in the horse industry that is against slaughter in itself, that would not make sense.
Everyone knows that, as in everything else, there are abuses and those no one wants, but slaughter itself is not the problem, mismanagement is.

If we think about it, there is abuse in every other place we care to look and we don’t try to ban it all, jumping, gaited, rodeo, racing, everyone has heard plenty every time someone was found to be abusive and punished, as they should.

I grew up where our riding school owner would be called by the slaughter plant manager and he would bring horses for us to train and retrain.
You can say that I was “saving” horses from slaughter long before many here were born.
Still, those horses that were there and no other job found for them were slaughtered.
The way they were handled and shot was in no way abusive, no different than the vet today giving them a shot, just that the horse could be then used one more time, it was not a toxic carcass as euthanized horses are.

As for people’s sick horse needing euthanizing, that is not the horses slaughter handles at all.
No one is insisting all horses be by law slaughtered, that would be an extreme.
No one is trying to pass those kinds of laws, so it is really absurd to see any other extremist here than the obvious animal rights extremists.

In the end, the side topic of slaughter was intended as a personal dig.

It was also a complete 101 logic fail to try to compare the rightness of participating by those caring for horses properly that also happen to know what the slaughter process is and how it fits in our world today, with someone that is blindly following animal rights extremists trying to eliminate all uses of animals by humans and that means horses also.

[cheval_convert]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;7901879]
One can defend an organization from an untrue accusation without defending everything that organization does. I even defend Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann from untrue accusations (some of those facebook memes are so ridiculous) and I can’t think of anyone I would be less likely to support.

If you go to the nursemare foals thread, you’ll see I also support the use of nursemares. I also support the TB racing industry as well as many OTTB placement orgs. I’m just a mixed bag and an animal welfare advocate like many of us on this forum. There aren’t many issues that are black and white…lots of shades of gray out there.[/QUOTE]

You support the racing industry and yet so many more horses die at the race track in a year than carriage horses have died from accidents in NYC in the past 20 years. If you think this stops with the carriage horses think again. If the carriage horses are banned on the basis of RARA’s saying, “we think it’s cruel”, with no documentation to back of the accusation then we all are at risk. Next, they will say they believe putting a piece of metal in a horse’s mouth “is cruel” and with no proof, they will put through a ban. Intellectually, this is about prime real estate, but it is being fought on an emotional level and it can only be won on an emotional level as well.

[cheval_convert]

[QUOTE=cloudyandcallie;7902160]
My answer and question to bluey;: Why would any one who believes in slaughter want to be on a horse board? There are varying degrees of animal rights activists, as there are people on the other side who love horses but have no problem shipping off of big trucks to slaughter rather than paying for Euthing and then burying the dead.

It’s all a matter of degree. Being far right or far left on any topic, animal or political, makes one an extremist. As I’ve often said, if there had been no Eldridge Cleaver and the other Black Panthers (and yes I met them in Berkeley in the 60s), no one would have listened to MLKIng Jr. (and yes, I met him and marched with him). I believe that there can be a middle ground on most issues. However, if you look at the original carriage horse thread from a year or two agoi, you’ll see that the carriage drivers ridiculed my idea of having the horses in the park.[/QUOTE]

Um, you do know that Central Park has it’s own board of trustees and to build stables in the park would be against the park’s charter, therefore, although it’s a nice thought, stables in the park would not be allowed. Were they ridiculing you or were they just saying that it could not be done?

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=cloudyandcallie;7902160]
However, if you look at the original carriage horse thread from a year or two agoi, you’ll see that the carriage drivers ridiculed my idea of having the horses in the park.[/QUOTE]

Ridiculed?
I do believe the NYCers explained that it is a nogo, not even in the realm of possibilities as the park is considered a landmark, etc and any changes need basically an act off god to be passed.
Not to mention there are 8 million people in the city, who knows how many special interest groups, who all want a piece of the park.

I think Eva had a pretty good example: It took them over 2 years to get a plaque approved to commemorate one of their drivers, something to go on an already existing park bench.

[Lynnwood]

[QUOTE=roseymare;7902255]
Wasn’t the drivers issues with park only that they felt there was no benefit in compromise because they had already tried compromise on other issues and it got them no where or even worse with the anti folks?[/QUOTE]

Rosey yes you are correct. Its not for lack of trying its that every compromise is taken 100 percent in the opposite direction and used negatively. Example if they were to accept the idea of the horses living in the park as a better compromise. Those most radically against their use at all would then (and have) take up arms that the compromise proves not being in the park was in some way abusive or inhumane. So then if their entire existence hinges on being able to stable in the park … and the antis now are saying their compromise indicates an acknowledgment out of the park is abusive …what happens when the CP conservatory shoots down the idea. It leaves them worse off then just stating the truth and what they always have… Living outside the park is not inhumane to the horses

[pluvinel]

You guys are missing the point by arguing about “animal rights”…you have just fallen for the NYCLASS bait.

This issue is not about animal cruelty or animal rights. Those are very inflammatory smoke screens to divert attention for what is essentially a land grab by a developer.

The stables occupy prime real estate…which are in a developer’s sights. And he’s using political leverage to get at the properties.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=pluvinel;7902848]
You guys are missing the point by arguing about “animal rights”…you have just fallen for the NYCLASS bait.

This issue is not about animal cruelty or animal rights. Those are very inflammatory smoke screens to divert attention for what is essentially a land grab by a developer.

The stables occupy prime real estate…which are in a developer’s sights. And he’s using political leverage to get at the properties.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, have been saying this from the start and pointed to the small chance the carriage horses have against that, a for the city better use of that land as far as taxes and economic advantage over what the carriage business is bringing them.

Hard to argue when some are choosing that for their city.

What we have been objecting here is how animal rights extremists are using this as one more place to brand all that have animals as second class citizens, and generally less than human, using their abuse card, which is clearly a lie there.

If some of the most regulated and inspected and working right in front of the public horses are abused, well, someone suspended belief there to think that is so.
Or are animal rights extremists, to which any use of animals by humans is unacceptable, for their illogical reasons of trying to make this a different world than it is, when we look at why humans use animals.

Once we agree that it is ok for humans to have animals, the NYC carriage horses definitely fit all the animal welfare best managed definitions and that is what needs to be pointed out, time and again.

[kdow]

[QUOTE=pluvinel;7902848]
You guys are missing the point by arguing about “animal rights”…you have just fallen for the NYCLASS bait.

This issue is not about animal cruelty or animal rights. Those are very inflammatory smoke screens to divert attention for what is essentially a land grab by a developer.

The stables occupy prime real estate…which are in a developer’s sights. And he’s using political leverage to get at the properties.[/QUOTE]

Pointing this out got a couple of people I know who are not horse people to reconsider their anti carriage stance, which had been based on the pr machine more than anything else.

After that they were willing to actually ask questions about how the horses are treated and what the regulations are versus what they’d been told.

[pluvinel]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7902902]
Exactly, have been saying this from the start and pointed to the small chance the carriage horses have …

What we have been objecting here is how animal rights extremists are using this as one more place to brand all that have animals as second class citizens, and generally less than human, using their abuse card, which is clearly a lie there.

…[/QUOTE]

1. Totally disagree that the fight is over. The carriage drivers belong to the Teamsters Union. If their Union wanted, they could follow the letter of the law and thus ensure that nothing got delivered into NYC in a timely manner…so there are avenues still available to the drivers.

2. I agree that attack on carriages is an attack on all horse owners…but it is a secondary issue to the land grab for the stables…which is THE ISSUE for NYC carriage drivers.

Focusing on emotional and inflammatory subjects takes attention away from the land grab and questions of disposal of personal property.

This proposed law isn’t just about getting rid of the carriages, The proposed law also stipulates what the horse owners are allowed to do with their property (the horses) and how they can dispose of (sell) the animals if they were not to walk the streets of NYC. Additionally the law is trying to eliminate a perfectly legal profession.

There are big issues here. And the discussion is being way-laid by the never-to-be-resolved question of “animal rights.”

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=pluvinel;7902915]

1. Totally disagree that the fight is over. The carriage drivers belong to the Teamsters Union. If their Union wanted, they could follow the letter of the law and thus ensure that nothing got delivered into NYC in a timely manner…so there are avenues still available to the drivers.

2. I agree that attack on carriages is an attack on all horse owners…but it is a secondary issue to the land grab for the stables…which is THE ISSUE for NYC carriage drivers.

Focusing on emotional and inflammatory subjects takes attention away from the land grab and questions of disposal of personal property.

This proposed law isn’t just about getting rid of the carriages, The proposed law also stipulates what the horse owners are allowed to do with their property (the horses) and how they can dispose of (sell) the animals if they were not to walk the streets of NYC. Additionally the law is trying to eliminate a perfectly legal profession.

There are big issues here. And the discussion is being way-laid by the never-to-be-resolved question of “animal rights.”[/QUOTE]

I agree and have said so time and again, the ownership of the horses in that bill is a big red flag the carriage association should be screaming from the rooftops.
Most any other citizen should be in arms about that.

I don’t know about their chances, had my doubts all along, because the city wanting a different use for part of it is close to eminent domain questions and we know how those end, the game there stacked in favor of the government.

I hope they can keep staying there, but it is going to be the same fight over and over again, the carriage business may be on borrowed time there, looking at the future.

[Chall]

The conservancy may oppose it, but as I pointed out before every other borough in NYC and Westchester has park land leased to stables. There is precedence.

[cheval_convert]

Yes, this is about a land grab and if the city came out and said, “We are taking this land by eminent domain”, although it would be terrible for the carriage drivers, it would be honest and would not threaten other horse owners. But, if they get this land through the lie of, “It’s cruel” then we are all at risk and it will be the beginning of the end for all of us horse owners. (And for the record, I do support the carriage drivers.)

[Caol_Ila]

Of course it is about the welfare of the horses. NYClass isn’t corrupt at all! I mean, what are a few measly blocks in Hell’s Kitchen worth?

Oh, wait. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/11/nyregion/group-against-carriage-horses-is-fined-for-illegal-campaign-donations.html?ref=nyregion

[pony4me]

It should also be noted that donations to NYCLASS are not tax deductible. It says so right at the bottom of their donations form on their website. That’s because per IRS Publication 526, page 3, donations to an organization whose purpose is to lobby for law changes are not deductible.

If anyone out there still thought NYCLASS was an animal welfare organization, they need to research and rethink.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=cheval convert;7902429]
You support the racing industry and yet so many more horses die at the race track in a year than carriage horses have died from accidents in NYC in the past 20 years. If you think this stops with the carriage horses think again. If the carriage horses are banned on the basis of RARA’s saying, “we think it’s cruel”, with no documentation to back of the accusation then we all are at risk. Next, they will say they believe putting a piece of metal in a horse’s mouth “is cruel” and with no proof, they will put through a ban. Intellectually, this is about prime real estate, but it is being fought on an emotional level and it can only be won on an emotional level as well.[/QUOTE]

I’ve only said I don’t think they belong on the downtown streets of NY in crazy traffic. This is exactly what some of us are saying…the you’re with us or against us mentality is only harming your cause.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=pony4me;7903080]
It should also be noted that donations to NYCLASS are not tax deductible. It says so right at the bottom of their donations form on their website. That’s because per IRS Publication 526, page 3, donations to an organization whose purpose is to lobby for law changes are not deductible.

If anyone out there still thought NYCLASS was an animal welfare organization, they need to research and rethink.[/QUOTE]

Your thesis is correct, but your proof is not. Yes, NYCLASS is not an animal welfare group, but the lobby arms of animal welfare groups are also not 501©3s.

[Graymaresrule]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;7903103]
Your thesis is correct, but your proof is not. Yes, NYCLASS is not an animal welfare group, but the lobby arms of animal welfare groups are also not 501©3s.[/QUOTE]
The tax exempt status of HSUS and PETA has been in question for years.

[pluvinel]

[QUOTE=Caol Ila;7902964]
Of course it is about the welfare of the horses. NYClass isn’t corrupt at all! I mean, what are a few measly blocks in Hell’s Kitchen worth?

Oh, wait. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/11/nyregion/group-against-carriage-horses-is-fined-for-illegal-campaign-donations.html?ref=nyregion[/QUOTE]

Just to highlight this link…posted yesterday, Dec. 10, 2014 in NYT…so getting lots of attention in NYC

New York Group Against Carriage Horses Is Fined for Illegal Campaign Donations

A group lobbying for a ban on carriage horses has agreed to a five-figure penalty for making illegal campaign contributions to two New York City Council members in the election last year, which the group now says were the responsibility of its former political consultant.

The group, New Yorkers for Clean, Livable and Safe Streets, known as NYClass, was subject to the city’s corporate-donation limit of $2,750. But it gave in-kind contributions worth $8,436 to Mark D. Levine, who won a Council seat in Upper Manhattan, and worth $7,618 to Laurie Cumbo, who was elected to a seat representing parts of Brooklyn.

Penalties can be as much as $10,000 per violation. On Wednesday, a person who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak about the fine said that NYClass had agreed to a penalty in the “low five figures.”
…

And another posted the day before
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/nyregion/as-two-sides-rally-new-york-city-council-introduces-a-bill-to-ban-carriage-horses.html?action=click&contentCollection=N.Y.%20%2F%20Region&module=RelatedCoverage&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article

As Two Sides Rally, New York City Council Introduces a Bill to Ban Carriage Horses

Amid rallies by animal-rights advocates and drivers of horse-drawn carriages, the New York City Council on Monday introduced legislation to ban carriage horses, acting on a much-delayed campaign promise by Mayor Bill de Blasio.

The drivers — a few wearing top hats and at least one in a tuxedo — gathered at City Hall and argued for the preservation of their livelihoods. Two hours earlier, people carrying posters that showed overturned carriages and debilitated horses lying on city streets said they were concerned about protecting the animals’ lives.

Though a poll this summer showed that New Yorkers were overwhelmingly opposed to a ban on horse-drawn carriages, the back-to-back rallies set the stage for what council members expect to be a heated debate before a vote next year. A majority of the 51 council members appear to be undecided, and just a handful appeared at the rallies on Monday.

“It’s going to be a close one,” said Councilman Fernando Cabrera, who represents parts of the Bronx and who said he supported the ban.

It will be close…the best we can do is educate people of the politics and money driving this.

[cheval_convert]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;7903099]
I’ve only said I don’t think they belong on the downtown streets of NY in crazy traffic. This is exactly what some of us are saying…the you’re with us or against us mentality is only harming your cause.[/QUOTE]

And when they decide that they don’t think horses belong on race tracks will you reach out to other horse owners? This is not about whether you agree or not with horses being on the streets of NY. It is about whether or not the practice in and of itself constitutes abuse. If the carriages are shut down on that claim, horses at the race track will not be far behind. And if you think it can’t happen just remember Massachusetts banned greyhound racing on the basis of cruelty. They put a lot more than 200 people out of work just before Christmas of 2008 and the dogs were sent to other states to race: states that did not have as good a record as Massachusetts when it came to quality of care of the dogs and with placing them in homes when their careers were over.
This is not just about saving the right to drive carriage horses in NY, it is about our right to race, show and ride our horses free from the fear that the horses will be taken from us because what we do with our horses is “cruel”.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=cheval convert;7904859]
And when they decide that they don’t think horses belong on race tracks will you reach out to other horse owners? This is not about whether you agree or not with horses being on the streets of NY. It is about whether or not the practice in and of itself constitutes abuse. If the carriages are shut down on that claim, horses at the race track will not be far behind. And if you think it can’t happen just remember Massachusetts banned greyhound racing on the basis of cruelty. They put a lot more than 200 people out of work just before Christmas of 2008 and the dogs were sent to other states to race: states that did not have as good a record as Massachusetts when it came to quality of care of the dogs and with placing them in homes when their careers were over.
This is not just about saving the right to drive carriage horses in NY, it is about our right to race, show and ride our horses free from the fear that the horses will be taken from us because what we do with our horses is “cruel”.[/QUOTE]

To better understand this, to animal rights extremists, this is not about the animals themselves, but the ideology of not having any humans touch animals in any way.

Realize that any that happens to any animals today will be acceptable collateral damage, so some day there won’t be any more “animal slaves”.

When you understand that, you can see why PETA really doesn’t care to take surrendered animals, or steal them and kill them.
They think those animals are better off dead.
Animals to them are not real as individuals with their own nature and lives.
The idea of animals and the strange world they imagine without humans is what drives them, could be some other like “save the rain forest”.
“Rebels with time on their hands and looking for a cause to get behind”, as someone called them long ago.

No one can reason with people like that, not in the NYC carriage situation, not on any forums, the frames of reference way to different, the differences irreconcilable and impossible to bridge.

To animal rights extremists, this is first about keeping donations coming in, of course, free publicity, then about eliminating all uses of horses, NYC carriage horses or any other just one more battle.
They have all the time in the world, unlike the rest of us, that are spending our time caring for and doing something with our animals.