[QUOTE=Daventry;7597125]
There are currently NO restrictions in place for EAV positive semen crossing the Canadian-U.S. border. So health record exposed or not, the U.S./Canadian borders does not care. ;)[/QUOTE]
That is unfortunate!
[QUOTE=andyvee;7597096]
Wouldn’t it be nice to go back in time and let it play out. Who really knows what would have happened. It could of gone through court, it could take a number of years for assests to be forced to sell, for people to be paid, for her to be pushed out of business. Or maybe it would have taken so long that it never ended up happening. Who knows. That the problem, none of us are psychics.
There are just too many sides to this story, too many opinions, to many points of view to properly air this out on an online board.
I think it’s just sad all around. 
innocents get screwed, stallions get defamed, farms get crushed. I guess I’d just rather try to look at the best of a very crappy situation.[/QUOTE]
No one is defaming redwine and as far as I’m concerned regarding Ashland they jumped in bed with Jill. They did this to their own business. If you don’t want to appear unethical you don’t do business with unethical people. You lie down with dogs don’t be surprised if you come up with fleas.
To all breeders who want to breed to him or continue to do so, you are benefiting Jill. You can’t breed to redwine without doing so. There is no magical bypass, you benefit her when you benefit redwine. It’s bad to hop into bed with her accidentally or incidentally (pre 2013). It’s plain foolish, and rather disgusting to have all this information, and to still hop into bed with her.
Regarding benefitting or not. I understand leasing as you give something and get something in return. A word I learned to express something different is e.g. lending. You give something and do not get anything back for it.
So where I am wrong in the Interpretation of the Expression xyz farm leased abc stallion ?
I a astonished why People that JB owes a lot of money are not trying to get Hands on this asset. Maybe they do and it is just not public knowledge ? In any caase I whis the horse(s) a good life.
[QUOTE=alexandra;7597174]
Regarding benefitting or not. I understand leasing as you give something and get something in return. A word I learned to express something different is e.g. lending. You give something and do not get anything back for it.
So where I am wrong in the Interpretation of the Expression xyz farm leased abc stallion ?
I a astonished why People that JB owes a lot of money are not trying to get Hands on this asset. Maybe they do and it is just not public knowledge ? In any caase I whis the horse(s) a good life.[/QUOTE]
In the US leasing a horse is done as lending an animal for one year at a set price. Aka the person leasing the horse pays the owner x amount of dollars to utilize the animal for one year. During this time the person leasing it pays all expenses associated with the animal. If the animal is a revenue creator, like a stallion more creative terms such as the owner getting a percent of it’s earnings can also come into play.
If this inside knowledge person is correct, and Ashland paid bills instead of cash to lease redwine, no one can go after that money. You can’t collect what you are owed, when it appears she never had that money in her account.
[QUOTE=alexandra;7597174]
Regarding benefitting or not. I understand leasing as you give something and get something in return. A word I learned to express something different is e.g. lending. You give something and do not get anything back for it.
So where I am wrong in the Interpretation of the Expression xyz farm leased abc stallion ?
I a astonished why People that JB owes a lot of money are not trying to get Hands on this asset. Maybe they do and it is just not public knowledge ? In any caase I whis the horse(s) a good life.[/QUOTE]
Sadly the US system is not set up to make it easy for people to regain funds owed. I have a civil suit I won against a former employee of mine in the amount of around $16K. I will most likely never see the money as she has no assets to gain. JB does have assets but she may have them under her husbands name, a different business, etc making them untouchable. Even if they could go after RW as an asset he would have to be sold through the sheriff’s office, then the proceeds used to pay the sheriff first for the service, the auction house for their service, then the remaining money (if there is any) get split between all the folks she owes money to. Very complicated system and sadly in favor of the criminal.
As horrible as this sounds for the animals involved EVERYONE should stop using her stallions and buying foals/ horses from her. That will be the only way the cycle ends. I know it sucks to remove money away from JB that she would use to feed her horses but it the only way to end her business. For example, the only way to stop a puppy mill is to stop buying the puppies. I tell folks all the time that feel like the “rescued” a puppy from a pet store that gets it’s puppies from a puppy mill that all they did was support the business. Now is the time to put the pressure on JB as she will, to some extent, be watched over during her probation. She will have to feed the horses despite not having income. It could make it almost impossible for her to not sell off the horses.
well, it is obvious he won’t be returning to a MANOR!
No offense intended. If the farm was to go through the expense of bringing the stallion to the area, how could they support his care if they aren’t breeding?
I don’t know all the expenses involved but it can’t be cheap. Unless a business has the luxury of being able to swollow such costs (especially in the horse industry) I don’t see how it could be done?
[QUOTE=Pippigirl;7597402]
No offense intended. If the farm was to go through the expense of bringing the stallion to the area, how could they support his care if they aren’t breeding?
I don’t know all the expenses involved but it can’t be cheap. Unless a business has the luxury of being able to swollow such costs (especially in the horse industry) I don’t see how it could be done?[/QUOTE]
The obvious answer is they don’t go through the expense of bringing the horse to the area and let the chips fall where they may. He was no longer in any danger as the MHS was involved. He was not rescued by anyone, he was business transaction not a humane one.
You’ve got to look at things from a long term perspective. They made a rash decision and what sounds like a gamble. They were expecting Jill to have her hand forced by the humane society to sell the horse. At not nearly his asking price. Unfortunately by keeping him at stud, they proved people are willing to overlook GFFs involvement and continue to breed to him. Is it any more of a gamble to purposefully devalue the horse?
Had he bred zero mares, and had sat in a stall or pasture and done nothing his value significantly diminishes. It’s why I said had they not gotten involved they would have been able to buy him for peanuts. Now he is an in shape, show ready, popular breeding stallion, whose had the best care. They have zero bargaining power now. Frankly they can’t say no one will breed him under your ownership because that’s false, and would be insulting.
Let’s call a spade a spade. They thought that by enabling Jill to get have a place to send her cash cow Redwine. It put the stallion in their hands . Hedging on her being convicted and then disbursing the horse. Like someone said they were in the market for a new stallion and I am certain they thought they were being clever bailing Jill out a little so that they had control and first dibs on the stallion when the shit hit the fan. It wasn’t about saving or protecting Redwine it was an attempt to secure an asset.
All i I can say is Karma Karma. All they have succeeded in doing is getting some new clients for Jill for years to come .
I was more looking at the words definition from economical point of view. Leasing involves always two sides of gaining something in exchange.
I wanted to make sure that if people are talking Leasing it means it is not a one way direction but a two ways. No matter of compensation is direct payment or paying other bills or sending every week a care parcel to JB with groceries. Leasing involves something goes back to the owner of the asset in exchange.
So if a farm says we have leased is must be very clear to everyone there is a compensation of whatever kind (for sure after substracting expanses…). So being surprised that one “helps” JB if the far states RW is leased is rather astonishing…
@ Blume: it is the sae over here - even worse people can file a personal bankruptcy (not of a company) and than you can look and see your mutstanding money diinish… Happened to me - name of the person - that sells by the way non existing horses internationally from Germany - can be provided if interested.
[QUOTE=alexandra;7597560]
@ Blume: it is the sae over here - even worse people can file a personal bankruptcy (not of a company) and than you can look and see your mutstanding money diinish… Happened to me - name of the person - that sells by the way non existing horses internationally from Germany - can be provided if interested.[/QUOTE]
Glad we are not the only place in favor of criminals:( Here too, a person or business can file bankruptcy and not have to pay any debt…except to the government! If you owe back taxes those are never wiped clean, even if bankrupt. Funny how the government always gets their money, but citizens do not.
[QUOTE=Show boots;7596870]
Your words not mine were that those who had their photos stolen should be flattered. Do you tell that to other victims of theft? Hey US steel, be flattered they stole your intellectual property. Hey victim of theft be flattered they picked your house. Hey car theft victim, your car was exactly what they needed they couldn’t help themselves to it. You should be so flattered.
I’m glad you can take care of your horses, but by breeding back this year you are putting money in the the Burnells pocket, you should be so Proud.
Back on track. I can only hope that for Jill to get romantic star back she has to pay back all bills incurred for all horses. I doubt she will be ponying up the money spent, for an older stallion, and old open broodmares.[/QUOTE]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.
But people were supporting her, buying horses, paying stud fees, and she still wasn’t a) delivering semen or b) feeding the horses. So giving her money seems only to be supporting Jill annd allowing her to acquire more horses.
[QUOTE=lauriep;7597634]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.[/QUOTE]
Well if we were talking about a sane and reasonable person when you can’t afford the ones you have you get rid of/ sell them. Nobody should feel guilted into supporting her because if not she starves them instead.
Like posted above , Jill has been mishandling owed monies and taking sub par care of the horses long before it reached this prior critical point. How many judgments are there against her ? That was going on while plenty of people were buying horses and using her stallions.
[QUOTE=lauriep;7597634]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.[/QUOTE]
Jill’s horses HAVE SUFFERED even when her business was “booming”. Funneling money to Jill Burnell and enabling her to have a “horse breeding business” is in no way a guarantee that the horses will be cared for. It hasn’t been in the past, I see no reason why things would change now (except for now the law is making sure she provides the very bare minimums).
I would prefer NOT to enable Jill Burnell to own horses, breed horses, and otherwise be in the “horse business”.
So - rather than funnel money to Burnell, so she can continue to breed etc - I would rather that she be forced to SELL her horses, and get out of the horse business.
I do not see how funneling money to Jill Burnell “helps the horses”. Enabling her to have horses - does not help the horses.
People BEGGED to get their mares back from JB and she REFUSED even though she was not caring for them.
Profits from horses does not equal care for the horses when it comes to Gray Fox Farm.
So, what I would I like? I would like JB to get a REAL JOB, and quit making money off of her puppy mill of a breeding facility.
Perhaps if she wasn’t being enabled, she would be finally forced to sell her stock.
[QUOTE=lauriep;7597634]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.[/QUOTE]
I think you can answer that question yourself. If you were to run out of money what would you do with your horses? To make the example even more pointed, if you owned the animals which she owns, animals which seem to be valuable and sought after from what I have been reading (I haven’t read all of this so am I wrong?), what would you do with them? I take it that she doesn’t have thirty-five-year-old charity-case geldings but valuable prime-of-life breeding animals, right?
So many starvation cases seem to involve people who are able to feed themselves well and sometimes show no evidence of financial stress. They just starve their animals. I don’t know what Jill Burnett’s situation is and why she would starve her horse to death or fail to keep those apparently valuable stallions safe and well-fed. Whatever her financial situation, there is no reason or justification for starving or failing to care for her animals.
Does anyone know how many mares are left in her care? Which ones? I remember when all this went down mare owners were trying to get their mares back and several left. Several on her website at the time weren’t even in her possession and never had been. I hope Romantic Star goes to a quality owner when this is said and done.
[QUOTE=lauriep;7597634]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.[/QUOTE]
Yep I won’t have someone that had a hint of involvement after the conditions of her house and the removal of her horses came to light. She was not paying a house payment, wasnt paying bills,wasn’t buying horse feed, wasn’t buying vet care, wasn’t buying farrier work, wasn’t buying horse shelters. After she suggested she had to close redwines book because it was bursting at the seams. Where pray tell did that money go?
And seriously had local animal control not been called by a worried friend, I have very little doubt any vet work would have been done on either stallions.
There are only two possibilities for what would happen if no one supported the Brunells. She would sell her horses or she would starve them, people were driving by and watching and starving animals would be confiscated by animal control, and after so many confiscations had occurred she would have no horses, and have no way to make money or she’d be in jail.
It was very apparent from the humane society going back for more animals after the first confiscation that they were not going to allow the animals to suffer to death.
She’s not paid you, she’s swindled countless other breeders, she has taken money with no good will to provide service, she killed a horse from her own greed and negligence, she starved others, she stole from her own parents for goodness sake. You don’t see how even being associated with her would be off putting?
I don’t support known animal abusers. There are some very well known horse trainers who you couldn’t pay me to take a lesson from or buy something from. There are too many ethical people in the world.
[QUOTE=lauriep;7597634]
I am just curious about something. And I in no way support Jill, and wish she could no longer own horses. BUT, for now, she can and does. So, if you stop using Redwine, or stop buying foals from others that use him, just exactly how do you want her to be able to feed the ones she has? I have wondered this for awhile, with all the hue and cry about never supporting anyone with even a hint of involvement with her. IMO, only the horses she has will suffer, not her.[/QUOTE]
As I said in a previous post…this is how puppy mills stay in business. People feel bad so buy a little puppy feeling like they “rescued” something. All they did was pay the puppy mill and allow them to stay in business. As long as people feel like they are “rescuing” RW and paying a stud fee all they are doing is allowing JB to stay in business. The money she makes on stud fees is not going to go to give her horses decent care. Now is the time to put the pressure on her “business” as AC has a watchful eye on her during her probation. So when no money is coming in and she can’t care for the horses she will have to sell them, give them away, lease them out, etc.
