scatcat
Elementary Poster
Posts: 99
|
Post by scatcat on Dec 30, 2006 16:12:01 GMT 1
Kayron you are wrong! My sisters young filly needed 8 shots of sedatiojn top have vet attention...She just fights it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2006 16:19:08 GMT 1
Kayron, I'm not sure why you are so insistent on darting a domestic horse. Yes, vets dart wild animals, but for medical treatment not for training. They do not then try to teach them to accept human contact and headcollars. There are other, fairer, more effective ways of dealing with a horse who won't be caught, so why not use them? Put it this way, if you were a horse, how would you feel if someone thwacked a needle in you, made you feel even more scared than you were already, then expected you to give your trust?
For the record, I have dealt with a weanling filly who had not been caught for months and as a result still had a winter rug on in June. Her owner had called the vet to get her sedated. The vet - a friend - had refused but called me. It took her owner and I about 15 minutes to coax her into a pen, then another 20 minutes for me to handle her, take her rug off, put it back on, take it off again, then stand with her relaxed while I stroked her all over. How long would that have taken with a sedative?
|
|
|
Post by mags on Dec 30, 2006 16:20:43 GMT 1
Kayron you do realise that some horses have died from sedation, not exactly worth the risk for a few hours groundwork. Not sure where the wild animal thing comes in though as we're not dealing with wild animals. Thats completely different ball game
|
|
|
Post by Rosie J on Dec 30, 2006 17:01:59 GMT 1
well, im i think sedation should be an option left for emergency medical care type of scenario only. but, i have to say, Im not sure I agree with OP on this thread - sorry Liz Its just I would rather everyone felt able to hsout out all sorts of silly ideas, fair enough not everyone will have the experience/ability to come up with great ideas ,but Id rather have to read through 10 silly ideas in the hope of finding something new than only get the same monodrone response of 'we cant help but call and RA and wear a hat' dont get me wrong, that line DOES apply to every situation possible, but the whole point in the DG for times is to have new ideas and sollutions come up, and I feel a bit like this thread goes against that. Yes, some people will give silly or dangerous adive - but then again there will be lots of people to speak up against it. One thing is for sure, advice is only meant in a helpful way, im pretty sure both the giver of the advice and the person who asked the qu would be pretty pleased to learn why their ideas would not be useful afterall. I think as long as people do keep asking questions, and getting experienced replies as well as new ideas, then we can all keep learning. saying dont give advice unless you know it wont be wrong is like stopping people thinking of new things, or stopping epople who are a little underconfident anyway trying their ideas out. Discussing them here before trying them at home means its likley someone will be able to advise well before an accident happens. to make sure the end 'answer' to a qu is fair and safe and educational, we need more and more people to contribute not less.
|
|
|
Post by SarahW on Dec 30, 2006 17:32:58 GMT 1
And, as I added to the thread about the kicking weanling - horses under sedation are extremely unpredictable even in capable hands. Our local vet was kicked by a horse under sedation - there were no warning signs first - the vet's head came into contact with the wall and he has had a very rough Christmas. Sedation should only be used in dire emergencies and in Highlander's case it wasn't an emergency.
Liz P's comments are absolutely spot on (as always) and should be kept on this board permanently. I think that there is a danger that just because someone is on the IGDG it may be assumed that the advice they give is IH. Unfortunately, unless you have done all of the courses, you may not be doing it the IH way at all.
|
|
|
Post by Zoe RA on Dec 30, 2006 18:25:33 GMT 1
Sorry Rosie, but I would rather people say they don't know what to do but they know people who will know what to do (IE the RAs), than came up with hare brained advice that is potentially damaging to both horses and humans!
Yes, I agree that just because an idea hasn't been thought of before, or comes from an "unqualified" person obviously doesn't mean it is a bad idea, but given the range of experience and ability that is exhibited daily on the bored it is extremely important that people realize what is involved in both giving advice and receiving it.
I stand by my original post!
|
|
|
Post by Rosie J on Dec 30, 2006 18:39:36 GMT 1
I totally agree that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing etc. but I think we have to trust in the person who asks the questions to be responsible enough to think through and research the replies rather than take it on face value. I know that this might not always happen, but I dont think we can sacrifice the learning experience of sharing ideas because of this. As far as I know there hasnt been a DG related accident yet, long may it last! Some people who havnt done IH courses have other areas of expertise which are valuable for IHDG discussions, ACs homeopathy, chiropractics, psychology, or just one horse woners with interesting ideas or experiences. Their views are all valid, and indeed, necessary for this board to flourish. If people wanted to know what IH would say exactly - they should ring an RA - I put thins in almost all my advice 'ring an RA'! but I think part of 'the IH way' is trying to work with horses kindly and effectively, and there are new ideas for doing this which come up not neccesarily from the IH courses, in order for IH to be constantly evolving as the best training program/thing, we need this constant assessment and input, new ideas and techqniues, some of which will go against the grain, some of which will be revolutionary and some of which will be downright silly. Perhaps there aught to be a reminder, that if you are going to give advice/ideas, you aught to run through a checklist to make sure it fits with the ethos of IH - i.e. is it safe? is it non violent? even then some people would put silly ideas up, because they dont realise the danger/cruelty, but I think thats part of the discussion which we all learn from. What I mean is, I dont want everyone to get the same advice straight from the course manual. I mean 99% of the time, thats great, but we have to keep the floodgatesd open for new ideas, that might be useful or compatible with IH. Hope Im not going on and on. I think being safety conscious is so so important, but its a shame if it gets to the stage where I dont feel I can offer advice in case there is a miscommunication or misunderstanding and somehow an injury is caused. I think that would be very sad. I think we just have to trsut the posters to be responsible in the way they take advice, and not to follow anything blindly. If someone jumps off a cliff because some silly person told them too - surely its there own responsibility to look out for cliffs? Especially because I am sure any advice given on here is meant in the most helpful way, and if it is not helpful, that is a genuine mistake, and a chance to learn. I can understand why RAs are unwilling to post more though, because its IH name you are representing if you are misunderstood or whatever, but for Tom dick and Harry, this aught to be a good place to suggest anything, even if you are then corrected by your peers. Maybe there aught to be a clearler notice that advice given is not neccesarily IH advice, but I have always understood that perfectly well. In a nutshell I think some non-IH (as in not on IH courses yet) advice is needed in order for the board to remain IH -minded (as in finding the best possible way..). Now Im talking in riddles!!!
|
|
|
Post by Rosie J on Dec 30, 2006 18:42:37 GMT 1
afterall, this is a discussion group of horsey friends, not a paid appointement with a client, as long as noone is claiming to be waht they are not, surely we can chat about our ideas as we would in the local tackroom? IH is just providing the tack room and the imaginary pots of tea.
|
|
blueali
Olympic Poster
water horse vs. land horse
Posts: 822
|
Post by blueali on Dec 30, 2006 18:49:54 GMT 1
I do think we should be able to suggest slightly unusual solutions even if we have not tried it ourselves but I also agree that some comments are irresponsible. I am very aware of writing it is just my opinion and my experience and try to explain everything fully with the pros and cons.
I would think the lassoo idea wa a joke, but obviously not. But I would have the sense to know I can't lassoo, I don't have a western saddle with a horn on which to achor the horse, I do have access to polo ponies that might be manouverable enough to get close but would have no chance on another horse. And given all the alternatives would class it as a crazy suggestion. And I hope most people would also be able to deduce that but I do know knowledge is very lacking in some cases.
As for sedation, don't wild animals get darted with enough to knock them right out then an antidote is given really quickly to stop them dying? We had one sedated to have its wolf teeth out, the vet gave her the maximum he dared, she was wobbling with her nose on the ground but when he tried to touch her mouth she dragged us both around, quite impressive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2006 19:20:25 GMT 1
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that new ideas shouldn't be aired or that we should only ever turn to the RAs. I'm the last person to want to stifle debate and discussion. What I am saying, though, is that I think sometimes posters should maybe reflect a little more before putting forward an idea that may well have negative consequences.
Sorry to disagree, Rosie, but I think the assumption that everyone who reads replies on the forum is going to think through the full range of consequences of a course of action is one I wouldn't make. On the contrary, given that I don't know most people from a hole in the ground (sorry, guys), I would feel safer making the assumption that they would just follow an idea through without thinking it out or, more likely, that some just don't have enough experience to grasp those consequences fully. When you're answering someone who you only know by a DG login name, I just think you have to assume the lowest level of understanding unless you have evidence to the contrary for the good of the horse. You may end up insulting the experience of someone but at least you won't be responsible for (maybe) the first DG accident.
|
|
|
Post by janetgeorge on Dec 30, 2006 19:43:54 GMT 1
Vets manage to sedate wild animals all right - . Actually, darting wild animals is not something most vets get asked to do often - if at all!! My vet is one of the exceptions as he looks after the routine vet work for the West Midlands Safari Park and often has to dart animals that require treatment. It is NOT easy - nor particularly 'safe' (for the animal.) Just a better risk than leaving a sick or injured animal untreated OR trying to catch it by force (which would result in considerable stress - at least.) The problems relate to the weight of the animal (it's relatively easy to estimate the weight of a horse you can handle and measure, NOT so easy with a large brown bear who'll kill you if you get too close!!) AND where you can get the dart in - whether it goes into a muscle or fat - how that particular type of animal reacts to the drug, etc. etc. etc. I KNOW he would be extremely reluctant to try it on a horse except in the most extreme emergency.
|
|
|
Post by jennyf on Dec 30, 2006 19:46:47 GMT 1
I have to say that sometimes posters have problems that are maybe just too serious to be given answers on any kind of forum. Of course, it is wonderful that we have this pool of knowledge to draw on in times of need. Most of us know when it is necessary to call out the vet without asking on this forum. Many of us know when we need a little extra help whether it be from a riding instructor, or an RA or another kind of equine person. I do shudder sometimes though at some of the questions asked, and some of the replies. I try to read through my answers several times before attempting to give anyone advice even though I've been around horses for probably 40 years. I am still learning, and still need help and advice from time to time. I am very careful not to offer any kind of help advice unless I have a certain level of knowledge about the problem in hand. As for the sedation question - I would only use that as a last resort in times of extreme emergency or if the animal were in danger. Like LizP, I would always use other methods and would get hands on help. It is difficult when you don't know the level of experience that a poster on this board has, unless you happen to know them of course. There are several groups of people on here that have got together and know each other (and their horses), but that's not always the case.
|
|
|
Post by Zoe RA on Dec 30, 2006 19:51:30 GMT 1
Rosie, as you know, with Intelligent Horsemanship, you get exactly what it says on the tin - intelligent horsemanship That, in a nut shell, is working with horses in a safe, empathic, sensitive, effective, knowledgeable way.
Kelly tells people on the Courses that just because they didn't read something in a book or learn it from someone else, doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. All of us who work with horses are learning all the time from the horses and people we work with, and in contrast with many methods, their is no one way to achieve the result that is desirable, which is why the wealth of knowledge that has come together on this board is so invaluable to horses and there handlers around the World.
Liz, in my opinion - only mine you understand - nothing really needed to be added to your original post or your last one. I only posted on the first page to endorse what you had said and to point out that I have never yet got the full picture of the horse from either an email or a phone call, and rarely got it until about halfway through a training session - in spite of going through a detailed Assessment Questionnaire with the owners before I every get as far as working with a horse! I just wanted to highlight that the pit falls of either taking or giving advice on here are deep and wide!
|
|
varkie
Grand Prix Poster
Grand Prix Poster
Posts: 4,913
|
Post by varkie on Dec 30, 2006 21:12:33 GMT 1
I both agree & disagree with LizP on this one. I agree that everything that we do with a horse should be safe for the rider/handler/horse, and fair on the horse too. What I disagree on, is how we define this - what is considered safe or fair by one person may be considered unsafe or unfair by another. Similarly, we may disagree with what is counter-productive.
As to the sedation thing, I think that can depend on the horse and the situation. Generally I would agree it's not an ideal solution, but there may be situations where it's use is warranted. I don't think you can make a hard or fast rule on it.
|
|
kayron
Intermediate Poster
Posts: 107
|
Post by kayron on Dec 30, 2006 23:51:50 GMT 1
For the record - I havent used sedation with a dart - but could certainly see cases where it may be the only reasonable option.
It isnt a short cut to training. Training comes afterwards!
And yes - I have dealt with "wild" totally unhandled horses - successfully - with no force used. You may come and meet the rsult if you'd care to!
|
|