Hoarding

Have you ever watched Animal Cops on Animal Planet? They show a lot of cases, especially on the Houston episodes.

You might try contacting the local SPCA to see if they could put you in touch with some investigators who could give you insight into the other side.

I have to raise my hand and admit to this. When I saw the title of your post I laughed and went 'i wonder if horses count' and then I read the post and suddenly wasn't laughing at all.

I hoard horses. And it started really small.

I had one horses, and was shopping around for a second for my daughter. People I spoke to spoke to other people, and then I got a call from a girl I knew from college who knew someone who knew someone else who was looking to get rid of a horse. She didn't have the space, and the mare was old so she was just giving her away. I had a bit of space and some free time, so I said, sure, why not, thinking that she would be a companion for my own riding horse.

The mare arrived, turned out to be an unbroken 16 year old broodmare. A year later she was competing in riding club. She was such a success story that when I was offered another one from someone else I said yes.

The problem with that is that it very quickly snowballed.

People who have older horses, or unridable horses, or just ones that they can't afford to keep anymore, or ones with issues or foals they can't handle, they generally know someone who knows someone who knows me. And as most owners would rather give the horse away then have it put down, I get a phone call.

We've recently had to move because I need more space. I don't really ride much these days, instead I just look at my horses over the fence.

I trained as a veterinary nurse, and I have a friend who's a vet who treats my horses for free, another friend is an equine dentist and she does my horses teeth in return for me breaking her horses. I took courses in college on farrierry, and all my horses are barefoot, so I do them myself too. All of which keeps the cost down.

The main cost is feeding. We are making our own haylage this year, for the first, so that should keep our costs down more.

I'm by no means the worst person for hoarding, I know a guy who hoards horses too, he's well over the 150 mark, but doesn't know exactly how many he has.

Also, in terms of behaviour of the person, I'm totally normal and well adjusted with no psychological issues, and I have the paper to prove it. I'm also really soft and very emotional and am a sucker for a sad case.

That seems to be the mind set of the other people I know in the same situation. They all think they are doing something good. And a lot of the people are. But it's hard to keep it under control. I have to be realistic about what I can do on my own, or even with help. And that's why every year I have to have a sort of cull - passing on the horses that don't need me to someone else, rehoming them or loaning them out to someone else.

I'm very careful about welfare and care, and I ensure, much to my bank managers disaproval, that my animals are well fed and well cared for.

But my main issue is space. I just don't have enough stabling, and so most of them live out ok, but I have to keep space for anyone who is is sick or about to foal.

It's time consuming, and I have very little help.

Other people I know and know off, who have been in the same situation have suffered because they take on more than they can cope it, and so the sick animals get sicker, and the old get thin and weak, sometimes without anyone really noticing.

There are lots of articles on google about animal hoarding. And the RSPCA have some very good resources about it, so I suggest giving them a call.

There's also a new show on Animal Planet about animal hoarders!
http://animal.discovery.com/tv/confessions-animal-hoarding/

I know you're doing animals so this link won't be helpful, but it's too crazy not to share anyway. Did you hear about the woman who was missing for 4 months until they found her dead in her junk? http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/28/las-vegas-pack-rat-found-dead-in-her-hoarded-possessions/

PinkAmy said:

I know you're doing animals so this link won't be helpful, but it's too crazy not to share anyway. Did you hear about the woman who was missing for 4 months until they found her dead in her junk? http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/28/las-vegas-pack-rat-found-dead-in-her-hoarded-possessions/

Click to expand...

Reminds me of a recent CSI episode.

Interesting quote from Amy's article:

Michelle Carro, an assistant psychology professor at the University of Nevada, told The Las Vegas Review Journal that hoarding happens when people find it impossible to make decisions, organize themselves or focus on immediate tasks.

Click to expand...

there are a couple of good series about it, there's one showing here now that I keep catching ads for, can't remember what it's called though.

http://tlc.discovery.com/tv/hoarding-buried-alive/

and there's a series called Hoarders which shows here too. You could probably catch it on youtube.

If someone had given me access to thousands of dollars when I was 12 or 14 I totally would have started hoarding horses. I would have wanted them to breed them to get unusual looking ones. I would have been like being able to play a real life version of a monster breeding game, and I've always loved those "gotta catch 'em all/gotta fill your monster book by breeding hidden options" sort of games. I did at that age collect toy horses, and had over 200 of them. Fortunately or unfortunately, at some point I learned to mostly confine my hoarding to the virtual realm. Though I do at this point have more than two bookcases full of books, and probably should get rid of the ones I haven't looked at in years.

"Hoarding" is generally used not to refer to collecting horses you can afford to look after properly, but collecting horses you cannot afford to look after properly, abusing and neglecting them, and living in denial of this fact--opposing rather than seeking help.

veinglory said:

"Hoarding" is generally used not to refer to collecting horses you can afford to look after properly, but collecting horses you cannot afford to look after properly, abusing and neglecting them, and living in denial of this fact--opposing rather than seeking help.

Click to expand...

People do disagree a good bit about what "look after properly" means though. There's a narrow line between, say, an amateur dog breeder and a small-scale puppy mill. WRT horses, if I thought mustangs were awesome and somehow owned 100 acres of useless land I might come up with the idea of setting 20 domestic-raised horses free with no medical or other care to see what happened. One person's science experiment is another person's reason to call PETA.

sunandshadow said:

People do disagree a good bit about what "look after properly" means though. There's a narrow line between, say, an amateur dog breeder and a small-scale puppy mill. WRT horses, if I thought mustangs were awesome and somehow owned 100 acres of useless land I might come up with the idea of setting 20 domestic-raised horses free with no medical or other care to see what happened. One person's science experiment is another person's reason to call PETA.

Click to expand...

I think in this instance people would call the Humane Society or the ASPCA (humane law enforcement), not "PETA". And rightfully so.

Rowan said:

I think in this instance people would call the Humane Society or the ASPCA (humane law enforcement), not "PETA". And rightfully so.

Click to expand...

That demonstrates my point. You think it would be 'rightfully so' but there are people, and not crazy or sadistic ones, who would disagree. Personally I think it would be impractical because domestic-raised horses aren't going to know how to feed themselves or deal with other problems of wild living. But I don't think it would be ethically wrong. Horses were wild animals for millions of years before human domestication, and the existence of feral horse populations in the world demonstrates that horses can successfully go from being domestic to being wild. The casualty rate for transitioning a group of domestic-raised horses to wild living would just be impractically high, and creating a feral animal population might be irresponsible because it creates a disease danger for any nearby domestic populations of the same animal.

My husband's family used to care for an elderly hoarder. She was very kindhearted, loving, and not really connected to reality at all.

The hoarders I know of/hear of usually start out with the best of intentions and end up over their heads. Then they either deny there is a problem (for some psychiatric reason) or they seek help but can't find it, because they are disabled and homebound, or don't know anybody, or the people they do ask refuse, etc. and it spirals out of control.

The woman his family cared for hoarded everything though, not just cats. She'd been feeding strays for years, and at some point started letting them into the house and they took over, having kitten everywhere and going to the bathroom all over.

When his dad started looking after her he began taking the sickest cats one or two at a time to the shelter to be put down until she was down to her favorites (I think there was 8 or 9) which was pretty manageable compared to before. He managed to get those in to be neutered over time. She never noticed. Her house literally had knee deep garbage, soaked in cat urine. The furniture was soaked in cat urine, it was horrible.

After she passed away she left her house to them. They had to gut the interior and put in new floors and drywall. I helped clean out a couple rooms and we found several mummified cat bodies buried in roach droppings and cigarette ashes that nobody even knew were there. It was pretty sad.

In hoarding cases the cruelty general meets the requirements of state law for torture or agravated cruelty. i.e. not a matted coat, more like open wounds or severe emaciation.

My point being: it a disorder, not a hobby. The best information is available at Tufts university where they have a team specialising in this disorder.

sunandshadow said:

That demonstrates my point. You think it would be 'rightfully so' but there are people, and not crazy or sadistic ones, who would disagree. Personally I think it would be impractical because domestic-raised horses aren't going to know how to feed themselves or deal with other problems of wild living. But I don't think it would be ethically wrong. Horses were wild animals for millions of years before human domestication, and the existence of feral horse populations in the world demonstrates that horses can successfully go from being domestic to being wild. The casualty rate for transitioning a group of domestic-raised horses to wild living would just be impractically high, and creating a feral animal population might be irresponsible because it creates a disease danger for any nearby domestic populations of the same animal.

Click to expand...

JOY: Sorry for the derail.

Bolding is mine...

So, having said that--you're still claiming this would be a fantastic idea (experiment)?

Dumping a herd of domestically raised animals in the wild for the purposes of an "experiment" would be classified as inhumane, not to mention scientifically unnecessary, by a number of people. Not only because you're subjecting these domestic animals to conditions that could inevitably lead to their pointless suffering and demise, but also because many states are already dealing with "wild/feral" horse populations and the resulting problems.

It seems your argument is "they were once wild, let's set them free again!". Seriously? I think scientists have all the data they require on this topic so there's no need for further 'experimentation'. What would be the point??? Morbid fascination? Or, as you mentioned earlier...a "monster breeding game"? Seriously, WTF?

There's a reason many humane societies have laws against animal dumping.
http://www.act-az.org/
http://www.sanantonio.gov/animalcare/PDF/Animal%20Abandonment.pdf
http://www.kvoa.com/news/animal-cruelty-task-force-asks-for-information-about-dumping-ground/


So yeah, I think you'd have to be "crazy" or "sadistic" to carry out such a useless "experiment".

It seems your argument is "they were once wild, let's set them free again!".

Click to expand...

Personally, I think people who say this should be dumped in the Canadian wilderness with just the clothes on their backs. As an "experiment". Humans were once "wild" too.

Shaldna - if it makes you feel better, you're not a hoarder.

If you were a hoarder you would take in more horses that you could feed OR you would be using money you need for bills/living expenses to feed your animals instead. You would not 'cull' every year, but only add to your herd.

I would say you sound like someone who rescues horses that no one else wants, rehabilitate the ones you can and find them good homes.

Some books on the topic:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1439192529/?tag=absowrit-20

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0547422555/?tag=absowrit-20

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195300580/?tag=absowrit-20

I remember seeing an episode of Clean House where a police detective couldn't give up any of her stuff--even though she couldn't get to it or even find anything. It didn't even matter that it was causing sanitation problems (mice droppings)! It was horrible watching it because everyone said they wanted to live better, were sick of all the stuff and the piles--but they wanted to keep everything.

Hoarders have little or no control over their behavior. They need a lot of help and intervention from caring friends, family, medical professionsals, and in the case of animal hoarders, help from professional animal care experts. I find hoarders fascinating and am addicted to the three hoarding shows I know about: Hoarders on A&E; Confessions: Hoarding Animals on the Animal Planet; and Buried Alive on TLC.

Animal hoarders cannot make the correct and rational decisions for the care of their animals. Their animals are often sick and dying and the hoarder doesn't recognize it. They feel they are the only ones who can care for these particular animals and are fearful of losing them. Often on the shows they refer to them as their children - and literally mean it. It's not just an expression. They often live in filth and animal waste and simply do not see it as a problem. As the animals' health deteriorates, so does the hoarder (and any family members living with them.) Entire homes are destroyed as the problem escalates.

I plan to include a hoarder in a story I'm writing. Hope I can do the subject justice.

And one show I saw recently did include a horse hoarder. She took in too many horses and could not care for them all. (She also had dogs and cats.) A veterinarian and her life partner finally convinced her to give up some of her horses to other care-givers who could give them the proper attention.

I have no experience with animal hoarding specifically, but with hoarding in general. I have nothing to offer in this conversation except to beg you to please not get your information or make judgments about hoarding and hoarders from the television shows that sensationalize it. If someone's knowledge of hoarding and similar behaviors comes from those televisions shows, then he or she really knows nothing about it.

Those are dramatized for ratings, they're audience entertainment, so you're only seeing what the show lets you see both in terms of bad and good things. The people are provoked into those breakdowns for drama, and the results at the end are often staged. It's not an accurate representation by any means.

And no, collectors are not necessarily hoarders. Hoarders aren't necessarily collectors. There's a whole range of behaviors.

Shelley

Rowan said:

JOY: Sorry for the derail.

Bolding is mine...

So, having said that--you're still claiming this would be a fantastic idea (experiment)?

Dumping a herd of domestically raised animals in the wild for the purposes of an "experiment" would be classified as inhumane, not to mention scientifically unnecessary, by a number of people. Not only because you're subjecting these domestic animals to conditions that could inevitably lead to their pointless suffering and demise, but also because many states are already dealing with "wild/feral" horse populations and the resulting problems.

It seems your argument is "they were once wild, let's set them free again!". Seriously? I think scientists have all the data they require on this topic so there's no need for further 'experimentation'. What would be the point??? Morbid fascination? Or, as you mentioned earlier...a "monster breeding game"? Seriously, WTF?

There's a reason many humane societies have laws against animal dumping.
http://www.act-az.org/
http://www.sanantonio.gov/animalcare/PDF/Animal%20Abandonment.pdf
http://www.kvoa.com/news/animal-cruelty-task-force-asks-for-information-about-dumping-ground/


So yeah, I think you'd have to be "crazy" or "sadistic" to carry out such a useless "experiment".

Click to expand...

I don't recall ever saying that I thought this experiment was a fantastic idea. My opinion is that it is interesting but impractical, due to the likely high fatality rate. I also never specified a location, hypothetically one could be found where no other horses and maybe no humans lived; a private island perhaps. Even better, a newly terraformed planet which needs to be stocked with wildlife. I don't agree that it would be inhumane, which is part of my original point that different people have vastly different definitions of what constitutes ethical treatment of animals. For example, many people for centuries saw nothing wrong with cock-fighting or dog-fighting; the cultures who felt this way also tended to see nothing wrong with doing the same to humans (which is if anything worse than dropping them in the wilderness). So I think the main point here is that in fiction it would be reasonable and interesting to create a character who thought this way.

As for the horse feralization project in particular, certainly one could increase the ethicality of it. There are established operating procedures for reacclimating captive-raised animals to the wild which could be applied to horses just as well as to an endangered species. The experimenter could use horses which normally lived outside and went barefoot, younger more adaptable individuals, and if the location had a shortage of salt or a cold winter, could provide the animals with salt blocks or extra food and a shed in winter.

The point would certainly not be morbid fascination; the goal would be for a large enough percentage of the horses to survive in good enough shape to start a breeding colony. The goal, to create a breed of wild horses with different traits and appearances from existing wild/feral horses such as mustangs and preswalskis. Perhaps one could use shires and clydesdales as genetic stock and get a draft wild horse. Or perhaps one could use only leopard appaloosas and try to get a pure-breeding wild spotted horse; the coat of such an animal might be commercially useful in the same way a zebra hide is. Horses aren't traditionally eaten because the meat is bad, but one could substitute deer, perhaps the goal could be to stock a private hunting preserve with unusual-colored deer or deer with unusual antlers to attract hunter customers.

What exactly is puzzling about comparing a real-life animal breeding project to an animal-breeding game? This type of game is directly inspired by real-world animal breeding, both are designed to inspire the breeder to create new or particularly pleasing results. It would me much more puzzling if they weren't conceptually similar. Perhaps you've never played a pokemon game or similar game though.

Most people probably consider a high rate of suffering and death makes an exerice not just impractical, but unthinkable. Thus this reaction even to the suggestion of it.

veinglory said:

Most people probably consider a high rate of suffering and death makes an exerice not just impractical, but unthinkable. Thus this reaction even to the suggestion of it.

Click to expand...

Enough said.

sunandshadow: it's obvious, at least to me, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Heartedly.

And no, I have never played a "pokemon" game. In fact, I've never even heard of it, and truth be told, have zero interest. But we're not talking about games here. We're talking about life--at least *I* am.

veinglory said:

Most people probably consider a high rate of suffering and death makes an exercise not just impractical, but unthinkable. Thus this reaction even to the suggestion of it.

Click to expand...

That's a poor thought-habit, to refuse to consider an idea out of knee-jerk reaction without fully exploring the possibilities. There are almost always factors unrelated to the main idea which can be adjusted to ameliorate bad consequences (e.g. following standard procedures for re-introducing captive-bred endangered animals to the wild.) And as writers, isn't it our duty to our art to try to understand how a variety of people think, so we can create a variety of characters?

Rowan said:

Enough said.

sunandshadow: it's obvious, at least to me, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Heartedly.

And no, I have never played a "pokemon" game. In fact, I've never even heard of it, and truth be told, have zero interest. But we're not talking about games here. We're talking about life--at least *I* am.

Click to expand...

I certainly know people who consider life to be a game. But I'm content to disagree. The OP's question was about what might motivate people to collect animals, and it's logical that one person's rationale for collecting animals would be something others object to. It makes for a rich book to have characters with fundamentally different philosophies, instead of everyone being similar to the author. None of this situation is personally relevant to me anyway, I do not own any animals. I own a moderately wide variety of tulips, but fortunately no one cares if I experiment on those.


You can skip this paragraph if you don't care what Pokemon is, I just thought I'd explain it briefly. Pokemon is a huge game franchise, both a card game and a series of video games. If you've ever been in a Walmart, Toys 'R Us, or any store which sells video games, they absolutely had pokemon games for sale there. The game concept was based on the real, few-decades-ago Japanese hobby for boys to capture beetles, keep them as pets, and pit them in non-fatal fights against other boys' beetles. Pokemon is also far from alone in the category of monster-breeding games. Monster Rancher and Digimon are two other popular series, and there are dozens of stand-alone games; in addition to the monster-battling type, there is the non-violent breeder tycoon type, for example Fish Tycoon, where the player owns an aquarium pet shop and breeds fish to sell there. The recent Petz: Horse Club game presents the specific scenario of managing a mustang reserve including the ability to breed the horses.