Catrina & Joshua Shears -- Turtle Beheading

However, decapitation is the rule and - apparently. So given that the animal's brain can remain alert and experience pain for some time after the blood flow is cut off, it doesn't seem to me like it would make a heck of a lot of difference if it took 5 seconds to completely sever the head and if it was all done at once with an axe.

I, too, found the video horrifying at first. But with more research... it doesn't seem like it is worse than what people are arguing "should have" been done.

Originally Posted by Dennis Hultman

You can't shoot them. You are left with catching them and killing them.

Hi Dennis,

Not 100% on this as it's an interpretation of the law rather than a law itself, but I'm pretty sure the no shooting is the method of take, rather than the method of dispatch. You have to trap them or grab them, but once you have them harvested you can kill them however you like. I think the law is this way to discourage folks from working the shoreline with a shotgun.

Beheading quickly would likely be fine, you're right. But smashing the brain with a hammer first, just behind the eyes would probably be ideal and is recommended by a number of the higher level medical books like Mader, and organizations like the AVMA. This is the method that I have seen most guys in Michigan use. They go out fast - often times the visibly displeasing methods are the most humane for the animal.

Originally Posted by Occidentalis

Hi Dennis,

Not 100% on this as it's an interpretation of the law rather than a law itself, but I'm pretty sure the no shooting is the method of take, rather than the method of dispatch. You have to trap them or grab them, but once you have them harvested you can kill them however you like. I think the law is this way to discourage folks from working the shoreline with a shotgun.

Beheading quickly would likely be fine, you're right. But smashing the brain with a hammer first, just behind the eyes would probably be ideal and is recommended by a number of the higher level medical books like Mader, and organizations like the AVMA. This is the method that I have seen most guys in Michigan use. They go out fast - often times the visibly displeasing methods are the most humane for the animal.

I think you are correct.

Originally Posted by Lucille

Any chance she is trying to help the horse and doesn't have a lot of land? If she maybe got it as a rescue it might be run down, what would be important to know is whether it is getting big healthy meals now, in her care.

Having been involved with a few equine rescues where AC was called because someone saw a thin horse on the property, as well as a retirement boarding facility where often the animals are simply thin because they're on the decline... if that were the case then she should be able to show some proof of recent acquisition, or a vet report stating that given the animal's age it's doing as well as can be expected, etc.

In those cases AC usually takes note and does a follow-up visit to see if there's any improvement.

If the people stalking her personal page would look a TINY bit harder, they would see she's only had the horse a month and the horse has visibly improved in that time.

That's great that the horse has improved. I'm truly and genuinely happy that it's looking better in the month she's had it. She has lots, and lots of posts, even in her public profile and I'll be the first to say that I haven't had a chance to read all of them. A pen in the back yard is no place for a horse to live. Period, and her post indicates that she plans on keeping Trinity in her back yard for at least a year because she doesn't have more room with her other horses.

Originally Posted by Agoralyx

A pen in the back yard is no place for a horse to live. Period, and her post indicates that she plans on keeping Trinity in her back yard for at least a year because she doesn't have more room with her other horses.

If she rescued a skinny horse and it is visibly improving, she is obviously doing something right.
She may be working toward more room, but right now she is doing well with what she has.

An emaciated dog's body condition will improve sitting in a 10x10 pen with food, that doesn't mean it has a good quality of life. I never saw in her Facebook page why she got this last horse, but if she doesn't have enough pasture for it, why buy it in the first place? Perhaps it is a rescue, but if she doesn't have the resources to properly care for it, and allow it room to run and graze freely, and companionship (other than, apparently, goats) that's not much of a rescue. If you can't afford to give the animal a quality life, then you shouldn't take the animal on. I totally respect everyone's right to agree to disagree. But having worked in rescue--that's my opinion.

Working on getting up the screen caps that I mentioned earlier.

I'm unfortunately not being able to find the posts about escalating to showing the bloodletting, not sure if it was removed or if I'm just not being able to find it now.

I'm a hunter, fisherman, and overall outdoorsman and idiotic people like them are the reason so many people are against what I do. When dispatching an animal you're supposed to show the animal respect and do it as quickly and humanly as possible. When I'm processing an animal that wasn't shot and already dead I either use a .22 rifle if it's large enough or I use a hammer and give it one quick whack behind the eyes.