# Should horses be allowed on the road?



## gambatte (27 Jan 2008)

Seems another threads got sidelined with this argument. Opinions are being voiced, but no real sense of proportion.

So.

Lets have a poll

(BTW. So long as you appreciate the potential for 'skittishness' I've got no problem with them and never had a problem with a rider)

The polls running for 2 days and will show your vote.

The thread that prompted this is:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=8022&page=4

This argument starts at post #39


----------



## Maz (27 Jan 2008)

I go past a field of horses on my commute, here at the jnct of Little Glen Rd and Leicester Rd (those stick things in the field are actually jumping fences). Sometimes the owners have to take them along the roads to get them to the fields. They're alright, those horses n riders. I like it when I see a horse on the road. It's so refreshingly different.


----------



## RedBike (27 Jan 2008)

I can see no reason why horses in general can't use the roads. If they're an inconvenience to other road users then that just tough luck.IMO they've got just as much right to use the road as anyone else. However, if the horse is likely to be danger to other road users then no.


----------



## longers (27 Jan 2008)

I think they should be allowed to continue to use the roads and it's barking mad to suggest otherwise.


There are the usual caveats about them being ridden by a competent or capable person and them being treat with respect by other road users. Much like anyone who takes any animal or vehicle on or near roads.


----------



## Muddyfox (27 Jan 2008)

Being born & bred in a rural part of Devon i encounter Horses on the road on a daily basis and if you give them the respect and courtesy that they deserve then you will rarely see a problem ... when people pass horses too close or too fast then the horse may get a little nervous but i can assure you i've seen plenty of cyclist wobbling around the road in the same situation 

Simon


----------



## HJ (27 Jan 2008)

Why shouldn't horses be allowed on the roads? There where horses using the road network before the car or even the bike were invented. Start trying to ban one class of road user is the thin edge of the wedge. What is really needed in more respect of other from the motorised road using lobby, those petty bullies shouldn't be tolerated...


----------



## andygates (27 Jan 2008)

Perhaps a more accurate question should be "should horses be banned from the roads?" - they're allowed on 'em already.


----------



## OldCobblers (27 Jan 2008)

Of course horses should be allowed on the road. 

They've been using the roads for millennia!

And that's quite a long time before the first car coughed into life.

And they'll still be there long after the last car's spluttered to a halt.

Fine by me.


----------



## John the Monkey (27 Jan 2008)

Yes from me - seeing them cheers me up. The riders will normally give you a wave, and sometimes pass the time of day. There should be more forms of transport where people can chat from them, I think.


----------



## Dave5N (27 Jan 2008)

I really don't like horses at all.

But other people do so it's not my business if they want to waste their time on one when they could be riding a bike.

And as I said, I don't find them a bother at all on the road. Just slow down and show a bit of courtesey. Ain't so difficult.


----------



## LLB (27 Jan 2008)

With a horse riders hat on, I will offer courtesy to everyone who does the same to me. It costs nothing, and goes a long way


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jan 2008)

I think the argument that horses have been using the roads for centuries, they were the main mode of transport in the middle ages yadda yadda yadda, is a valid one - you can't exactly just kick them off as they were there first.
However, most horse people drive 4x4s, even those that don't drive anything get groceries and other goods that have been delivered by motor vehicles, so basically all horse riders in the modern age are beneficiaries of the motor vehicle in some way, so they are just going to have to accept that motor vehicles and cyclists are a feature of our society in this day and age, so they have a modicum of duty to make sure their steed is safe around them, i.e. is trained (and trained WELL) not to throw a strop and rear up when it sees one, rather the putting the onus of blame onto the other vehicle driver or cyclist simply for being there. I would be more amenable to horses if their riders and owners didn't display such arrogant attitudes as those that think it's everyone ELSE's responsibility but theirs to ensure THEIR horse doesn't get spooked. Even the youngsters get trained to do it from a young age. I was once cycling past some, probably about 13 year old, girls on horses, and I rode past them at about 10mph, and gave them a wide berth of about 2 metres, they shouted after me quite indignantly and rehearsedly 'don't ride fast past horses!' I shouted back 'fast? you haven't seen fast!' their horses were fine, they didn't get spooked at all, they just wanted to be a bit bolshy as they're obviously psyched up to do by their posh parents.


----------



## longers (28 Jan 2008)

Bonj, hit the return button occasionally eh?

I didn't expect that response from you to be honest. You're right, horse owners do use the roads with motorised vehicles also and this gives them a good understanding of the intricacies of the problems on our roads. Most are excellent, considerate and thoughtfull drivers in my experience because that is the courtesy they would like shown to them. 

It is people with little patience, understanding and perception and a high degree of selfishness who make things unpleasant.


----------



## Abitrary (28 Jan 2008)

I haven't seen a horse on the roads in about 20 years (I think).

Anyone who sees lots of horses needs to relocate because the whole area sounds dangerous and unkempt.


----------



## bonj2 (28 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> Horses are allowed on the road because they are under the control of the riders.


Not all the time they're not!
I've seen a horse in a large group of horses rearing up and the rider was struggling to control it, it wouldn't stop rearing its front legs up and waving them about.
This was on a canal towpath, and it was doing this before I approached, so it wasn't me that caused it. I pulled in the side and held myh bike on the verge as close in to the hedge as I could while they passed, and they still frowned at me as they passed.
This although anecdotal is not atypical of the attitudes, and just this one little thing can make you angry as you continue your journey and take away faith in humanity's propensity to be nice to one another, and removes all respect horses.



linfordlunchbox said:


> If a cyclist were to act in a way to deliberately frighten the horse, then both the horse and its rider could be put in extreme danger. They are fight or flight animals, and 99 times out of 100, they would run from people on cycles acting in an aggressive manner.


But it's perfectly reasonable to expect a cyclist to "be there". Simply being there, or even moving along slowly, quietly and considerately, _doesn't_ constitute 'behaving in an aggressive manner', and if this is deemed too aggressive for the horse, then there's not really much else the cyclist can do about that, short of _not_ 'being there', and if this is the case then it's the horse that has got the problem, not the other way round, and therefore in my opinion it's the horse that shouldn't be there.

I'm not wanting to have a go at you linf, and I'm trying not to make this an ad hominem argument, so if you're a considerate horse rider who trains your horse well, is tolerant of other road/bridlepath users and appreciates courtesy rather than frowns when it is afforded to you, then I've no problem with you whatsoever. My beef is just with the fact that if you are those things, then unfortunately according to my experience you're in a minority, and your fellow equestrianists are letting you down as they're doing your side no favours with their bad attitudes..


----------



## Abitrary (28 Jan 2008)

Where are these horses???? Is this all to do with leisure cycling on horse paths?


----------



## longers (28 Jan 2008)

Abitrary said:


> I haven't seen a horse on the roads in about 20 years (I think).
> 
> Anyone who *doesn't* sees lots of horses needs to relocate because the whole area sounds dangerous and unkempt.




I added the bit in bold as it makes more sense now.


----------



## Keith Oates (28 Jan 2008)

Horses on the road have a right to be there but the owners should also ensure they are well ridden and have had some training. Something that doesn't always happen with some car drivers and cyclists, or so it seems!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## bonj2 (28 Jan 2008)

Abitrary said:


> Where are these horses???? Is this all to do with leisure cycling on horse paths?



To be honest there aren't that many you're right.
There's one bit near blacka moor near me which is a source of a lot of hourses, I think it produces 'em all 'cos it's some stables or other. And then there's the ones I saw on a towpath in lincoln. But if i don't go near there, i can be pretty sure of not seeing one.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (28 Jan 2008)

Yes they should be allowed on the roads, but without discourteous brats who shout at slow cyclists on their backs.

I do object to the big piles of shite they leave though. Heard all the excuses before, it's not toxic, difficult to tell when it's happened etc etc baws, you go out on a horse on a public road you should clean up after it. A drip tray at the very least.


----------



## byegad (28 Jan 2008)

I voted for horses to be allowed on roads. To be honest I'd be happy if I never see another on the road, but then I feel the same way about caravans and many other road users too. 
Why did I vote to keep them then? Because if we ever do ban horses, or caravans, or mad BMW drivers, the next group to be banned will be cyclists!


----------



## 515mm (28 Jan 2008)

byegad said:


> I voted for horses to be allowed on roads. To be honest I'd be happy if I never see another on the road, but then I feel the same way about caravans and many other road users too.
> Why did I vote to keep them then? Because if we ever do ban horses, or caravans, or mad BMW drivers, the next group to be banned will be cyclists!


Bang on the nail and exactly the same entirely selfish reason I voted no to a ban; the fear that we'll be next. 

I must admit to an irrational loathing of horse riders, or more accurately, horse owners. I catch myself thinking that the riders are pompous and the horses are a vulgar, ostentatious display of excessive wealth. Especially so if the rider is a child. I catch myself feeling that the child's parents must have bought every other status symbol they could think of, but they can't buy Darling Emma a car because Emma is too young to drive. They can spend thousands of pounds a year on another half-ton conveyance however, this time with a mind of it's own. That'll definitely get them noticed down at the golf club.

Like I said, it's not rational.

I've probably got that fiscal envy.


----------



## davidwalton (28 Jan 2008)

Up until not that many years ago, the horse was the main form of transport. The cart and horse was how EVERYTHING got to and from markets, unless you carried it yourself.

So what if now there are machines where their owners try and own the roads. Hardly any were built for them in the first place.

Reminds me a little about those who feel the elderly should not be provided with free travel, livable pensions, or treated with respect. They paid their dues, as have the horse & owners. Now lets shaft them seems to be ok with some!!


----------



## TheDoctor (28 Jan 2008)

byegad said:


> I voted for horses to be allowed on roads. To be honest I'd be happy if I never see another on the road, but then I feel the same way about caravans and many other road users too.
> Why did I vote to keep them then? Because if we ever do ban horses, or caravans, or mad BMW drivers, the next group to be banned will be cyclists!



Exactly so. All the arguments that could be used against a horse could be used against us. Rightly or wrongly, but that's immaterial. Repeat something enough and people will believe it, then use it against you.


----------



## fisha (28 Jan 2008)

Although more mountain bike related, horses are probably cyclists closest ally in the issues of public access on rights of way off road, and i suppose on-road, a close ally for right to be on the road too. 

Given the comments, it could also be argued that the horsey fraternity is one with a sizable weight in terms of lobbying power. The truely well heeled tend to know folk in the right places. Its a side I would rather be with than against to be honest. 


I do think horses should be allowed on the road, and I personally wish that more car owners respected that. I'm quite lucky in that I have a pretty bomb-proof horse who'll stand his ground. There has been more that one occasion where cars have shown no signs of slowing down on a single road, and i've actually stood the horse broad side with a hand out to force them to slow. I dont mind people passing and i'll pull in to allow them to do so, i do mind when they dont try to slow down atall or even accelerate to me.


As for bikes, not got an issue with anyone i've passed whilst riding. More cyclists round my way are considerate, and we'll both pull over for each other and say a cheery hello. 

The flip side when I'm on the bike, i'll always give loads of room and say hello to the horse. 


the view is better from a horse though.

Bike:







Horse:


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

515mm said:


> I must admit to an irrational loathing of horse riders, or more accurately, horse owners. I catch myself thinking that the riders are pompous and the horses are a vulgar, ostentatious display of excessive wealth. Especially so if the rider is a child. I catch myself feeling that the child's parents must have bought every other status symbol they could think of, but they can't buy Darling Emma a car because Emma is too young to drive. They can spend thousands of pounds a year on another half-ton conveyance however, this time with a mind of it's own. That'll definitely get them noticed down at the golf club.
> 
> I've probably got that fiscal envy.




I ride. Well, I did, before I had to give up because I hadn't got the money to spare to hire a horse for an hour a week for a lesson or hack. You have very little way of telling if a group of riders out on the road own their horses - especially if you are near a riding stables. As soon as I have a job and can afford to go again, I will, and I don't expect to be earning more than £12,000 p/a, probably less. 

I know one person who does own her own pony, well two, a Highland for her and Shetland to keep it company and for her daughter when she's old enough. Her husband is something to do with computers, and she works part time. They are comfortably off, I guess, but not 'rich' by many people's terms. She has the horses because she loves them, and it's nothing to do with ostentation. My other riding partners are all in a similar position - couldn't afford to own a horse, but enjoy riding.

When I am out on the road, I'm never pompous (well, no more than at any other time Actually, less so, I'm too busy concentrating on my riding), anyone behaving well gets a smile, and if I feel confident to take a hand off the reins, a wave. Cyclists usually get a nod and a hello, although I suppose they don't know why.

So bear in mind, that horse rider might just be someone like me who scrimps and saves for the priviledge.


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

fisha said:


> Horse:




 I like that. Makes up for not going at the moment...


----------



## LLB (28 Jan 2008)

bonj said:


> Not all the time they're not!
> I've seen a horse in a large group of horses rearing up and the rider was struggling to control it, it wouldn't stop rearing its front legs up and waving them about.
> This was on a canal towpath, and it was doing this before I approached, so it wasn't me that caused it. I pulled in the side and held myh bike on the verge as close in to the hedge as I could while they passed, and they still frowned at me as they passed.
> This although anecdotal is not atypical of the attitudes, and just this one little thing can make you angry as you continue your journey and take away faith in humanity's propensity to be nice to one another, and removes all respect horses.
> ...



When I say ' Originally Posted by linfordlunchbox View Post
Horses are allowed on the road because they are under the control of the riders.'

It is as opposed to them being left to roam the streets unattended.

If I were to see a horse rearing and the rider struggling to control it, or a parent wrestling with a small child on a cycle path, or a dog on a lead attempting to drag its owner across the road to see another dog, then as a bystander, It would be the sensible thing to wait and give them a chance to resolve the issue, not to barge through arrogantly. 
I'd hope you offer more consideration whilst in your van !


----------



## QuickDraw (28 Jan 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> Yes they should be allowed on the roads, but without discourteous brats who shout at slow cyclists on their backs.
> 
> I do object to the big piles of shite they leave though. Heard all the excuses before, it's not toxic, difficult to tell when it's happened etc etc baws, you go out on a horse on a public road you should clean up after it. A drip tray at the very least.



It's a £40 fine if you don't pick up after your dog so why is it different for horses?

Yes of course they should be allowed on the road but they shouldn't expect everyone to pussyfoot around them. The responsibility of controlling the "vehicle" should rest with the rider. If they get spooked by a bike at 20mph there's no way they should be on the road cos think what they'll be like when an HGV goes past at 30.


----------



## gambatte (28 Jan 2008)

If I'd got the cash I'd have one, probably with a buggy as well. Even the 'emissions' are compostable!


----------



## 515mm (28 Jan 2008)

Arch

As I mentioned in my post, it's an irrational feeling on my part which is definitely my problem. I try hard to not make any gross generalisations about anyone and my post was more about how unjustified prejudice can affect how we behave, even if it is only voting on a straw poll.

I rarely meet horses on the road, but when I do, I always slow down, talk gently to them if I'm on my bike and give them acres of space. I used to go horse riding with my sister at the local riding school when I was a boy and I really enjoyed it.

Like I have said three times now; irrational.


----------



## Terminator (28 Jan 2008)

Voted yes.If we are allowed on the road why not them?


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

515mm said:


> Arch
> 
> As I mentioned in my post, it's an irrational feeling on my part which is definitely my problem. I try hard to not make any gross generalisations about anyone and my post was more about how unjustified prejudice can affect how we behave, even if it is only voting on a straw poll.
> 
> ...



OK, sorry, I did spot the 'irrational' bit: I think I was more making the point to others than to you, but I should have made that clearer perhaps.


----------



## 515mm (28 Jan 2008)

My fault for not posting a clearer and less ambiguous post, surely?


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

515mm said:


> My fault for not posting a clearer and less ambiguous post, surely?




No, no, old chap. my fault entirely. (I think we've reached a politeness paradox here)


----------



## BentMikey (28 Jan 2008)

I can't believe the 6 supposed cyclists on here voting against horses. I suggest you lot either: stop cycling immediately or admit your hypocrisy.


----------



## 515mm (28 Jan 2008)

Hey Arch,

Less of the old! I'm young and really quite vigorous........




Though I do hear the teapot calling. Oooh walnut bread toast.

Mmmm.....


----------



## walker (28 Jan 2008)

I'm not sure if anyone is aware but upon approaching a horse from behind it is best to call up ahead that you are appraching as I have had a few horse's startled when I cruise past and one even nearly fell over with the rider on top.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (28 Jan 2008)

A hand up it's dirtbox would alert it to your presence.


----------



## gavintc (28 Jan 2008)

As much I think the continentals have the right idea about horse and serve it with a nice sauce, I would equally champion the concept that horses have a place on our roads. To me, the poll is rather like asking should pedestrians be allowed on the pavement and I agree with the words stated by BM above.


----------



## 4F (28 Jan 2008)

I was one who voted against. To be honest there is a large stables near me and whilst I am corteous and always slow and announce my presence I get a little fed up to be blanked or shouted to slow down when I am overtaking at a walking pace and giving them plenty of space. I of course appreciate that not all are like this however there are several in my area who are and it really pees me off. If they cannot control their animals then to be honest they should not be on the road.

I of course fully understand the irony of my position as this is exactly what some car drivers undoubtedly feel towards me and others when I am on my bike.


----------



## andygates (28 Jan 2008)

It certainly is. Shared space means sometimes sharing with things you're not to keen on, knowing that it all works out fair in the end.

What would you propose as an alternative? And with the precedent set for horses, how soon before Clarkson Man voted us off the roads too?


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

515mm said:


> Hey Arch,
> 
> Less of the old! I'm young and really quite vigorous........
> 
> ...



Ooops! Sorry again....

Mind you, I've known a older chap who was really quite vigorous, the two are not mutually exclusive...


----------



## tdr1nka (28 Jan 2008)

Has anyone even considered that horse riders, while controlling their mounts might just concentrating on the matter in hand.

Let me suggest a hypothetical example in cycling terms,

While out on your bike you have an altercation with a WVM.
WVM has nearly had you off with an unindicated left hook, but you have just stopped in time and besides the adrenaline coursing thru you, you are unhurt.
There is a brief exchange of guestures and curses and you and the WVM go on about your seperate ways.

How do you feel now? More importantly how does this effect your attitude to traffic around you?

I'd like to guess that like me, you will be feeling angry, frustrated and a tad more defensive than usual. I find myself far less tolerant of traffic after an incident like this.

Now put yourself in the position of the horse rider, if you have had bad experiences with a motorist or cyclist while on your ride, you will most likely tar every other that you encounter with the same brush.

T x


----------



## John the Monkey (28 Jan 2008)

515mm said:


> I must admit to an irrational loathing of horse riders, or more accurately, horse owners. I catch myself thinking that the riders are pompous and the horses are a vulgar, ostentatious display of excessive wealth.



That's not been my experience at all - as I say, I chat when the riders are willing to, and they've all seemed quite down to earth folk to me - one or two rather more well spoken than I, but nice enough people nonetheless. Genuinely I can't recall any rider not returning a wave as I pass, at the very least.


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

I dont see historic precedent as a reason for any antiquated practise. Weve weeded out many practises that are deemed archaic and no longer viable usefull.

I believe the test for a horse to be on the road should be its fitness for use on the road, any horse that is stressed by everyday traffic should not be allowed out with everyday traffic. A simple horse traffic safety "MOT" should be fine.

If the horse isnt safe or if the horse is frothing at the mouth in fear, its dangerous and cruel, sorry Im an animal lover that means I try to give my animals the best I I do believe if I had an interest in horses Id be keeping them in a field and riding them across moorland, not on busy 60mph limit roads. To me it seems theres far too many horses on the road which are simply being stressed for their riders personal pleasure.

If a horse cant hack being on the road under normal road use it shouldnt be there. Same as a car or cycle in a dangerous state. I feel the same way about unlit cyclists at night or cars with dangerous defects.

Local incident :- http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/d...me=yes&more_nodeId1=134831&contentPK=19686679

Motorcyclist shows enough couresty respect to the horse riders to completely shut down his vehicle in their presence but despite that when he restarted it after they had passed the horse rider was injured by their mount. Not the motorcyclists fault, thats a horse or horse rider combination that shouldnt have been out on the road in my opinion.

I do also believe that a diaper or similiar should be mandatory for road use plain disrepectful to everyone else to leave that stuff all over the road. A little courtesy to other road users, its nasty stuff...

I have no problems with horses being on the road, but I think it needs to be made sure its safe for everyday traffic, and to be ensured that its not causing the animal unnecesary distress and that its not littering the road.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (28 Jan 2008)

well said. And maybe if they were made to cart their own muck around they'd think twice about going out for a trot on a public highway in the first place.

I think the same should hold true of cyclists.


----------



## LLB (28 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I dont see historic precedent as a reason for any antiquated practise. Weve weeded out many practises that are deemed archaic and no longer viable usefull.
> 
> I believe the test for a horse to be on the road should be its fitness for use on the road, any horse that is stressed by everyday traffic should not be allowed out with everyday traffic. A simple horse traffic safety "MOT" should be fine.
> 
> ...



Lol, the idea of a nappy on a horse. I take it you never visited a farm yard as a child, and FFS, don't ever think of going to a 3rd world country as you might encounter animals which actually poo.

If you don't want to see animals, go live in the city. The countryside is not for you !


----------



## davidwalton (28 Jan 2008)

There are horses that should not be on the road, for their own safety, just like there should not be some Cyclists on the road for the same reason.

You do not suddenly say go screw yourself as we now don't want you on our roads. The roads do not belong to any one group, and horse and rider have just as much right to use the road as any other.

We should be designing transport to take in to account ALL road users needs, not just the latest and so called best mechanical gas guzzling monsters.

shoot happens, just more so when behind a horse It will wash away in time as it always has done.


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> Lol, the idea of a nappy on a horse. I take it you never visited a farm yard as a child, and FFS, don't ever think of going to a 3rd world country as you might encounter animals which actually poo.
> 
> If you don't want to see animals, go live in the city. The countryside is not for you !



Never visited a farm as a child? Im Devon born and bred doesnt mean I think we need sh!t all over the roads.

horse "nappies" have been around for a long long time - things like this :-

http://www.bunbag.com/

http://picasaweb.google.com/bhsussman/Nashville03/photo#5081857552309145666

Theres a lot goes on in 3rd world countries that I dont think we need over here... I dont feel a personal need to live as people do in third world countries...

I can see all the animals I want, I have no issues with horses on the road persay, I do think they should clean their own mess up like a dog owner should, and that the animal shouldnt suffer unduly and that if a horse isnt good with regular traffic it shouldnt be taken on the roads.

I feel the same way about RLJ and pavement riding and all manner of other unsafe illegal road use, its not a "horse" thing.


----------



## BentMikey (28 Jan 2008)

There's a big difference between horse doodoo and dog doodoo. Horse poo is relatively innocuous stuff and I'm not bothered with it on the roads. Dog poo is truely evil stuff, like that from most meat eaters.


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

BentMikey said:


> There's a big difference between horse doodoo and dog doodoo. Horse poo is relatively innocuous stuff and I'm not bothered with it on the roads. Dog poo is truely evil stuff, like that from most meat eaters.



I dont like horse poo either, possibly because I see too much of it... Pig poo is possibly the worst, cow isnt too bad wouldnt want it on the street either though.

Look back in urban history to that rose tinted time when horses ruled the road and you will find that one of the biggest complaints was the horsedroppings.

I dont believe leaving our crap on the streets is good in any form whether its old TV's - which dont smell and dont slide under tyres and dont stick to metal, or coke cans or diesel or anything else.

We had a good slogan down this way for a while, "leave only footprints"


----------



## Maz (28 Jan 2008)

Horses should be allowed on the roads only if they can cross safely and know the green cross code.


----------



## LLB (28 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I dont like horse poo either, possibly because I see too much of it... Pig poo is possibly the worst, cow isnt too bad wouldnt want it on the street either though.
> 
> Look back in *urban history* to that rose tinted time when horses ruled the road and you will find that one of the biggest complaints was the horsedroppings.
> 
> ...



I thought you said you lived in the country. Cow muck has a much higher water content, and pig shoot is like humans.


----------



## 4F (28 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Horses should be allowed on the roads only if they can cross safely and know the green cross code.



I thought horses were colour blind, how would that work ??


----------



## Maz (28 Jan 2008)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> I thought horses were colour blind, how would that work ??


In which case they should know the grey cross code. There's also a large print version for those that are visually impaired and one in braille for blind horses, though I can't see how that'll work what with their hooves.


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> I thought you said you lived in the country. Cow muck has a much higher water content, and pig shoot is like humans.



Ive seen plenty enough country pancakes... I've never anazlysed them at a scientific level Ive not run comparisons to analyse the difference content of different animals feces. I would say generally my order of preference goes cow, sheep, horse, pig, dog, thats not in order of moisture content thats just personal preference...

Ive already said I wouldnt want large amounts of cow pat all over the roads either, regardless of its moisture content. (and cow stuff dries relatively fast anyway) I dont seem to remember the moisture content of poo being the issue... Lets be clear here I dont like dung on the roads, regardless of source. I dont like litter on the streets regardless of type. I wouldnt have a problem with a person throwing a macdonalds wrapper on the ground in a refuse site. I dont have a problem with animal manure in a field etc etc.

I live here:-

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/davidtq/home.jpg

Ive spent a HUGE amount of time wandering across Dartmoor. I've seen plenty enough animal droppings in my time, I dont think the roads are the right place for large piles. Oddly enough I have no problems with animal droppings in the fields, but I dont think leaving your crap in the streets is right... whether literal or just regular refuse.


----------



## Maz (28 Jan 2008)

Biggest pile of crap I've ever heard.


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I've never anazlysed them at a scientific level Ive not run comparisons to analyse the difference content of different animals feces.
> 
> 
> > You might be surprised at the number of people who have! I managed a whole BSc dissertation on the subject (related to archaeological deposits).


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

Arch;169618][quote=davidtq said:


> I've never anazlysed them at a scientific level Ive not run comparisons to analyse the difference content of different animals feces.
> 
> 
> > You might be surprised at the number of people who have! I managed a whole BSc dissertation on the subject (related to archaeological deposits).
> ...


----------



## Arch (28 Jan 2008)

davidtq;169622][quote=Arch;169618][quote=davidtq said:


> I've never anazlysed them at a scientific level Ive not run comparisons to analyse the difference content of different animals feces.
> 
> I dont doubt theres many people who have  im sure the archaelogical stuff was generally quite low in moisture content?




Depends what sort of deposit it's in. The famous (in York archaeological circles) Lloyds Bank Turd from York was quite pliable I understand (named after the site on whichn it was found. And it was human...)

For the most part, it's been incorporated into the soil, and it's detection would be through the analysis of soil chemistry, micro and macro plant fossils and insect remains. There, my dissertation in one sentence![/quote]


----------



## davidtq (28 Jan 2008)

Arch;169678][quote=davidtq;169622][quote=Arch said:


> Depends what sort of deposit it's in. The famous (in York archaeological circles) Lloyds Bank Turd from York was quite pliable I understand (named after the site on whichn it was found. And it was human...)
> 
> For the most part, it's been incorporated into the soil, and it's detection would be through the analysis of soil chemistry, micro and macro plant fossils and insect remains. There, my dissertation in one sentence!



So how far back can you track a turd? how long before the stuff you are looking for becomes to "dilluted" or spread around to track? can you track individual stools or just general droppings areas?[/quote]


----------



## Maz (29 Jan 2008)

> I have numerous turds in a cupboard which have become family heirlooms. I believe one even dates back to 1903.


Why not get Dyno-rod out to unblock your karzy?


----------



## Jaded (29 Jan 2008)

I voted against. 

I think the idea of banning them is cruel. So I was confused.


----------



## bonj2 (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> When I say ' Originally Posted by linfordlunchbox View Post
> Horses are allowed on the road because they are under the control of the riders.'
> 
> It is as opposed to them being left to roam the streets unattended.
> ...


Obviously. As would I. You don't do that, I don't do that, so that's not the issue then is it. So i've no idea what your comment about 'i hope you offer more consideration whilst in your van' is all about, more than what? The mental image that you've conjured up in your head of me roaring past with only a foot to spare and falsely ascribed to me? Argue against the argument that's being put, not a piece of imaginary conjecture which as it happens couldn't be further from the truth.

What I'm finding issue with , is horse riders who take offence at cyclists or drivers simply for _being there_
- by scorning at them, either verbally, or simply a frown of ungratefulness when over and above due consideration and respect has been afforded. If you don't do this, good. But you can't pretend it doesn't happen. Therefore you can't condemn my justification for my dislike of horses and horse riders either by, probably correctly, asserting that you yourself are a very considerate horse rider, or by falsely pretending that I am inconsiderate around horses.
I DO behave VERY considerately around horse riders, it's just a lot of them are very ungrateful.


----------



## Dave5N (29 Jan 2008)

Bonj, come and have a ride in the worcestershire lanes. You'll get none of that from our local gee-gees.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> Look back in urban history to that rose tinted time when horses ruled the road and you will find that one of the biggest complaints was the horsedroppings.



This isn't true. Horse droppings were highly prized by street urchins, to the extent that they'd follow a horse down the street in order to collect its manure to sell.
Slightly OT, but there used to be a barrel on every street corner in London. Residents were expected to contribute a bucket of their own urine every day, on pain of quite a large fine if they failed to do so. The urine was then shipped up to the Cleveland coast to be used in the manufacture of alum, used as a fixative in dyes for clothing.
Personally, it would be rather hypocritical of me to be bothered by horse poo all over the road, given that my 20 year old Volvo estate and the articulated lorry I drive every day pump out lots of far more offensive (yet somehow more socially acceptable) pollutants. It's biodegradable and it washes away.


----------



## gambatte (29 Jan 2008)

Rhythm Thief said:


> This isn't true. Horse droppings were highly prized by street urchins, to the extent that they'd follow a horse down the street in order to collect its manure to sell.
> Slightly OT, but there used to be a barrel on every street corner in London. Residents were expected to contribute a bucket of their own urine every day, on pain of quite a large fine if they failed to do so. The urine was then shipped up to the Cleveland coast to be used in the manufacture of alum, used as a fixative in dyes for clothing.
> Personally, it would be rather hypocritical of me to be bothered by horse poo all over the road, given that my 20 year old Volvo estate and the articulated lorry I drive every day pump out lots of far more offensive (yet somehow more socially acceptable) pollutants. It's biodegradable and it washes away.



True, my grandparents used to own a garage next door to their house. They employed one guy (Mr Evans) partly at the garage and partly as a gardner/odd job man. If a horse 'dropped its load' outside the garage he'd get someone to stand guard, protectively, over it, whilst he went for a shovel and bucket.


----------



## beanzontoast (29 Jan 2008)

The real issue isn't with the mode of transport, it's the level of responsibility and adherance to the law shown by the driver/rider that counts. What this poll is really saying is "Should _responsible_ _horse riders_ be allowed on the roads?" to which the answer is yes.

Being surrounded by Derbyshire countryside, we meet lots of horses on the country lanes. We've been greeted politely and thanked almost every time for showing consideration by slowing down on our bikes - even stopping for riders under instruction. If car drivers find horses a problem, they should examine their own driving habits.


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

> I've never seen a horse spooked on the road, nor has one ever had an adverse reaction to me passing in the car or on the bike.
> 
> Do you have any unusually frightening facial features Simon?



Bad Hair Day


----------



## Dave5N (29 Jan 2008)

> *I've never seen a horse spooked on the road, nor has one ever had an adverse reaction to me passing in the car or on the bike.*
> 
> Do you have any unusually frightening facial features Simon?



Well that's a bit odd Mr P. Nor have I. In fact I was beginning to feel a bit left out here, as I don't find horses any bother at all (apart from the bourgeois reactionary opressor come-the-revolution etc stuff).

Maybe West Midlands horses are a cut above?


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

This is the ERA of horse transport I remember learning about in history :- The horse at its peak in victorian times. Considered a evil necesity.

I still dont like crap on the roads and think if you do take your house for a walk theres measures you can take to keep things a little nicer for the rest of the population. Not to do so is selfish and unthoughtfull. As much as you may like sh!t all over the roads I think getting rid of it from the streets was one of the better ideas society has had. Horse polution was as big an issue in its prime as car polution is today.

Gambatte what decade were your grandparents talking about if they owned a garage the chances are that the days of horse drawn transport being defacto were long over...

Horse excrement might be biodegradeable, so are burgerking wrappings, I dont appreciate either being left in the streets by people who are too selfish and lazy to do anything better about it. Same mentality to littering, personally Id rather ride around burger king wrappers than horse droppings. Both are the passing tokens of the inconsiderate in my opinion.

*http://www.amrep.org/articles/3_1a/civility.html*

*STENCH* Public and private spaces alike stank during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. On the streets of central London, drains were often blocked by garbage and horse droppings. Rubbish cascaded out of windows onto the heads of unlucky pedestrians below. Domestic fires polluted the air and blackened the sky with a noxious smog. As Patrick Süskind writes at the beginning of his novel, _Perfume_, "In [the eighteenth century] there reigned in the cities a stench barely conceivable to us modern men and women. The streets stank of manure, the courtyards of urine

In 1898, delegates from across the globe gathered in New York​
City for the world's first international urban planning conference. One topic​
dominated the discussion. It was not housing, land use, economic development, or​
infrastructure. The delegates were driven to desperation by horse​
manure.​

The horse was no newcomer on the urban scene. But by the late​
1800s, the problem of horse pollution had reached unprecedented heights. The​
growth in the horse population was outstripping even the rapid rise in the​
number of human city dwellers. American cities were drowning in horse manure and​
well as other unpleasant biproducts of the era's predominant mode of​
transportation: urine, flies, congestion, carcasses, and traffic accidents.​
Widespread cruelty to horses was a form of environmental degradation as well. ​

The situation seemed dire. In 1894, the _Times_ of​
London estimated that by 1950 every street in the city would be buried nine feet​
deep in horse manure. One New York prognosticator of the 1890s concluded​
that by 1930 the horse droppings would rise to Manhattan's third-story​
windows. A public health and sanitation crisis of almost unimaginable​
dimensions loomed. ​

And no possible solution could be devised. After all,​
the horse had been the dominant mode of transportation for thousands of​
years. Horses were absolutely essential for the functioning of the 19th​
century city - for personal transportation, freight haulage and even mechanical​
power. Without horses, cities would quite literally starve.​

All efforts to mitigate the problem were proving woefully​
inadequate. Stumped by the crisis, the urban planning conference declared​
its work fruitless and broke up in three days instead of the scheduled​
ten. ​

http://www.all-creatures.org/nyca/ch-hist-19711000.html​


It is easy to imagine that a hundred years ago, when cars were first appearing on our roads, they replaced previously peaceful, gentle and safe forms of travel. In fact, motor vehicles were welcomed as the answer to a desperate state of affairs. In 1900 it was calculated that in England and Wales there were around 100,000 horse drawn public passenger vehicles, half a million trade vehicles and about half a million private carriages. Towns in England had to cope with over 100 million tons of horse droppings a year (much of it was dumped at night in the slums) and countless gallons of urine. Men wore spats and women favoured outdoor ankle-length coats not out of a sense of fashion but because of the splash of liquified manure; and it was so noisy that straw had to be put down outside hospitals to muffle the clatter of horses’ hooves. Worst of all, with horses and carriages locked in immovable traffic jams, transport was grinding to a halt in London and other cities. ​
Moreover, horse-drawn transport was not safe. Road traffic deaths from horse-drawn vehicles in England and Wales between 1901 and 1905 were about 2,500 a year. This works out as about 70 road traffic deaths per million population per year which is close to the annual rate of 80 to 100 deaths per million for road traffic accidents in the 1980s and 1990s, although we must not forget that many people who died from injuries sustained in road accidents in 1900 would probably have survived today thanks to our A&E departments. Motor vehicles were welcomed because they were faster, safer, unlikely to swerve or bolt, better able brake in an emergency, and took up less room: a single large lorry could pull a load that would take several teams of horses and wagons – and do so without producing any dung. By World War One industry had become dependent on lorries, traffic cruised freely down Oxford Street and Piccadilly, specialists parked their expensive cars ouside their houses in Harley and Wimpole Street, and the lives of general practitioners were transformed. By using even the cheapest of cars doctors no longer had to wake the stable lad and harness the horse to attend a night call. Instead it was ‘one pull of the handle and they were off’. Further, general practitioners could visit nearly twice as many patients in a day than they could in the days of the horse and trap. (1) 1. Loudon I ‘Doctors and their transport 1750-1914’, Medical History: 2001; 45185-206 Irvine Loudon, Medical Historian​

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/333/7558/53​


----------



## beanzontoast (29 Jan 2008)

... and the award for the longest post of the year so far goes to?...

[opens envelope]


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq;169706][quote=Arch;169678][quote=davidtq said:


> So how far back can you track a turd? how long before the stuff you are looking for becomes to "dilluted" or spread around to track? can you track individual stools or just general droppings areas?



Well, the Lloyds Bank example came from the Anglo-Scandinavian (Viking) period if I recall correctly - over a 1000 years ago. It depends so much on the surrounding conditions. Most of York is waterlogged, which provides excellent preservation of organic material. In dry conditions, turds (or coprolites as we more properly call them) can also be preserved, by dehydration and a degree of mineralisation - I believe that can go back a very long way. But it also depends on the poo. A well formed turd with a fairly solid texture will be more likely to survive intact than anything sloppy - so the species makes a difference. And as poo has been used since farming began as a manure, and spread over fields, in that case it is unlikely that you'll find individual turds, more like a general chenical or microscopic signature. Within a settlement, a high phosphate or nitrate level in a distinct area, for example, might indicate a latrine, or an area where manure was stored prior to spreading, or a stable or byre. Whereas in the fields, there might just be a general raising of the level of certain chemicals.

BTW, in one latrine in York, they found a large quanity of apparently unused moss (medieval toilet paper). On closer inspection, it was discovered that it had been adulterated with holly leaves, which probably explains why it hadn't been used....[/quote]


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I still dont like crap on the roads and think if you do take your house for a walk theres measures you can take to keep things a little nicer for the rest of the population.




I think if I took my house for a walk, there'd be more for the population to think about than a bit of poo - trailing electricity cables, gas pipes, probably chunks of plaster and loose slates falling off. And as I only live in a flat, I bet my neighbours would be a bit pissed off....


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I dont like horse poo either, possibly because I see too much of it... Pig poo is possibly the worst, cow isnt too bad wouldnt want it on the street either though.
> 
> Look back in urban history to that rose tinted time when horses ruled the road and you will find that one of the biggest complaints was the horsedroppings.
> 
> ...



Whenever I bring the trailer home for maintainance, I always have the neighbours come out and ask me if there is any droppings they can have out of it for their gardens.

One of them stopped me on the road and asked where I keep them, could she go and collect some for her garden.

It is a biodegradable waste product which either dries out in a few hours, or gets washed away. It is at the end of the day just partially fermented grass.

I keep my horses on a working farm, and there are a couple of pigs in the pen next to the pony. What leaks out under their pen gate is really vile. I got it on the soles of my wellies last night and it absolutely stank the car out on the way home to the point that I had to run them under the tap before putting them back in the car for the morning.


----------



## BentMikey (29 Jan 2008)

I've only ever had a problem with horses on my recumbent, and then I can't blame the horses for not liking something that's low, fast, and looks a lot like a predator might. The problem is easily solved, simply stop, stand up, and talk to the horse and rider whilst they pass you. Result: chuffed horse rider, happy cyclist, good karma.

I used to have to do this all the time in Hyde Park, but the horses are very used to recumbents now, I and the other recumbent riders have effectively trained them.


----------



## Maz (29 Jan 2008)

Personal insults aimed at simoncc are bang out of order. If you don't like his point of view, fair enough, but there's no need to slag him off etc.
There. I've said it.


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> I keep my horses on a working farm, and there are a couple of pigs in the pen next to the pony. What leaks out under their pen gate is really vile. I got it on the soles of my wellies last night and it absolutely stank the car out on the way home to the point that I had to run them under the tap before putting them back in the car for the morning.



Pigs of course, are biologically the most similar farm animal to us, so their poo presumably disgusts us the most, being the most like ours in content.


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

Arch said:


> I think if I took my house for a walk, there'd be more for the population to think about than a bit of poo - trailing electricity cables, gas pipes, probably chunks of plaster and loose slates falling off. And as I only live in a flat, I bet my neighbours would be a bit pissed off....



damn those dyslexic fingers . Now does dog really exist??


----------



## Terminator (29 Jan 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I've only ever had a problem with horses on my recumbent, and then I can't blame the horses for not liking something that's low, fast, and looks a lot like a predator might. The problem is easily solved, simply stop, stand up, and talk to the horse and rider whilst they pass you. Result: chuffed horse rider, happy cyclist, good karma.
> 
> I used to have to do this all the time in Hyde Park, but the horses are very used to recumbents now, I and the other recumbent riders have effectively trained them.




Awwwwwwwwww that's lovely.


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> Whenever I bring the trailer home for maintainance, I always have the neighbours come out and ask me if there is any droppings they can have out of it for their gardens.
> 
> One of them stopped me on the road and asked where I keep them, could she go and collect some for her garden.
> 
> ...



Horse pony manure in the right place - no problems here, I really dont mind it being used as fertilizer, thats no problem, I dont appreciate it being left all over the road, any more than any other biodegradeable waste. Its still more unpleasant than the also biodegradeable fast food wrappers. Biodegradeability might mitigate the littering, but its still littering and unpleasant to me. 

Some people may love the sight and aroma of a well formed horse dump on the road. Personally I dont. and find the "I dont care attitude" as obnoxious and antisocial as the chavs with their fast food wrappers. Thats my personal opinion.

Seriously dung in the right places I have no issues with I dont give a damn about it when im walking the moors, but I hate it being left randomly in the road in urban areas. We have a lot of stables in the area and I personally hate what they do to the roads. Were not talking one or two droppings 

I do agree completely on pig stuff though, really vile stuff, glad they dont take those on the street often. It might smell bad when the farmers are spreading around here, but at least its not on the street and getting all over the place.


----------



## Terminator (29 Jan 2008)

I hate it when the roads are littered with cars and peds.


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> Horse pony manure in the right place - no problems here, I really dont mind it being used as fertilizer, thats no problem, I dont appreciate it being left all over the road, any more than any other biodegradeable waste. Its still more unpleasant than the also biodegradeable fast food wrappers. Biodegradeability might mitigate the littering, but its still littering and unpleasant to me.
> 
> Some people may love the sight and aroma of a well formed horse dump on the road. Personally I dont. and find the "I dont care attitude" as obnoxious and antisocial as the chavs with their fast food wrappers. Thats my personal opinion.
> 
> ...



I feel the same way about Horse droppings on the road as I do about Diesel spills, but Diesel is not biodegradable, is much harder to spot, and is much more of a problem than Horse poo will ever be !


----------



## Terminator (29 Jan 2008)

*I feel the same way about Horse droppings on the road as I do about Diesel spills, but Diesel is not biodegradable, is much harder to spot, and is much more of a problem than Horse poo will ever be !


*I found it easily last time I fell off.


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> I feel the same way about Horse droppings on the road as I do about Diesel spills, but Diesel is not biodegradable, is much harder to spot, and is much more of a problem than Horse poo will ever be !



I largelly agree with that, although to be fair I believe many diesels are biodegradeable... but I come across far more horse droppings than I do diesel spills. 

Horse droppings the rider knows about and there are solutions to stop it, diesel on the roads the owner may not know about. Certainly though anyone who is dropping diesel and doesnt do anything about it is a dangerous numpty. If you are dropping fuel the little puddle where you park is a good clue to get things fixed fast... Especially give the price of diesel these days 

Given a choice between equal quantities of diesel and horse manure on the road Id take the manure, but round here it isnt close to equal. I appreciate the many london dwellers reading probably deal with far more diesel than horse droppings .


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I largelly agree with that, although to be fair I believe many diesels are biodegradeable... but I come across far more horse droppings than I do diesel spills.
> 
> Horse droppings the rider knows about and there are solutions to stop it, diesel on the roads the owner may not know about. Certainly though anyone who is dropping diesel and doesnt do anything about it is a dangerous numpty. If you are dropping fuel the little puddle where you park is a good clue to get things fixed fast... Especially give the price of diesel these days
> 
> Given a choice between equal quantities of diesel and horse manure on the road Id take the manure, but round here it isnt close to equal. I appreciate the many london dwellers reading probably deal with far more diesel than horse droppings .





> Spiller Killer
> 
> Diesel spills - let's cap them!
> 
> ...



Another whinge is here , aptly called 'the weekly gripe' 

http://www.weeklygripe.co.uk/a540.asp


----------



## gambatte (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> Seriously dung in the right places I have no issues with I dont give a damn about it when im walking the moors, but I hate it being left randomly in the road in urban areas. We have a lot of stables in the area and I personally hate what they do to the roads. Were not talking one or two droppings



Take it as a warning to keep your eyes on the road. 99.9% of the time I'll spot it a mile off, and choose an appropriate line. When I’m out on the bike, I’d rather hit a 4” pile of horse manure than a 4” deep pothole. Fit crap catchers mudguards, no probs.


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

gambatte said:


> Take it as a warning to keep your eyes on the road. 99.9% of the time I'll spot it a mile off, and choose an appropriate line. When I’m out on the bike, I’d rather hit a 4” pile of horse manure than a 4” deep pothole. Fit crap catchers mudguards, no probs.



It is also a visible warning to drivers that there are vulnerable road users in the area (depending on the freshness  Ahem)


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

gambatte said:


> Take it as a warning to keep your eyes on the road. 99.9% of the time I'll spot it a mile off, and choose an appropriate line. When I’m out on the bike, I’d rather hit a 4” pile of horse manure than a 4” deep pothole. Fit crap catchers mudguards, no probs.



Id rather hit a empty burgerking box than a 4" pile horse turd...


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> Id rather hit a empty burgerking box than a 4" pile horse turd...



How many 4" piles of horse dung have you hit ?


----------



## rich p (29 Jan 2008)

I regard horses and their riders on roads as cyclists' allies against the car and always exchange pleasantries with them (the riders generally!). We did get cut up by a horse box the other day which was anoying.


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> How many 4" piles of horse dung have you hit ?



Well that depends on how you measure them I have to confess to not regularly carrying a measuring tape with me to measure them, but I would say the majority of "large" piles I see have at least one dimension over 4" you tend to get a "main lump" and lots of smaller bits. of course by time the cars have squished them a bit you get nice 2 feet long somewhat slimmer line piles...


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> Well that depends on how you measure them I have to confess to not regularly carrying a measuring tape with me to measure them, but I would say the majority of "large" piles I see have at least one dimension over 4" you tend to get a "main lump" and lots of smaller bits. of course by time the cars have squished them a bit you get nice 2 feet long somewhat slimmer line piles...



So what you are really saying is that your eyesight is good enough, but there are plenty of drivers out there who can't spot a pile of dung on an otherwise empty road ?


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> So what you are really saying is that your eyesight is good enough, but there are plenty of drivers out there who can't spot a pile of dung on an otherwise empty road ?



Along the worst of the roads cars avoiding such piles would be completely unsafe, 60mph limit busy route between two towns, narrow lanes a detour to avoid a pile could easily result in a lost wing mirror. Drivers are definetely best off Not trying to pick a route through it and just accept that their cars are going to get covered in crap to support someone elses passtime. That same person whos demanding extra courtesy on the road

Smokers throwing their "butts" out of their windows, chavs dropping their takeaway wrappers and horse riders dropping ther crap on the streets. Littering isnt pleasant in any of its forms even if it is biodegradeable.

I havent voted that horses should be banned because I dont think they should be, I do think basic safety tests should be mandatory before a horse goes on the road, and I do think a poop collector should be as well. Just good citizenship to not leave crap all over the roads, even if it is a type thats been around for a long time.


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

How do you suggest a rider collect and carry horse droppings from a busy carriageway ?


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> How do you suggest a rider collect and carry horse droppings from a busy carriageway ?



I believe I already covered that one with the "diaper" Which have been used for a long time as well. 

http://www.bunbag.com/

£35 doesnt seem a lot to pay for the sake of not being a litter lout compared to the cost of keeping a horse...


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

One for dogs also just in case the owners forget to scoop ?


----------



## LLB (29 Jan 2008)

> Caution: To avert a rodeo, accustom your horse to the bag properly!


----------



## jashburnham (29 Jan 2008)

Of course they should be aloud on the roads. I cycle a lot around the surrey lanes and see plenty of horses. IME their riders are always courteous and friendly, in fact probably the most polite of all road users. However I'd add one caveat to this - they should only be allowed on the road in the care of an experienced rider. Whilst down in Sussex over xmas I heard about a horse putting its hooves through a car windscreen at the local hunt gathering in Battle. By all accounts the rider was very inexperienced and had lost control of the horse sometime before the accident. No-one injured but imagine if that had been a cyclist and not a car.

They make damn good eating though. Off to Switzerland in March and am looking forward to a tucking into a nice horse steak!


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

davidtq said:


> I believe I already covered that one with the "diaper" Which have been used for a long time as well.
> 
> http://www.bunbag.com/
> 
> £35 doesnt seem a lot to pay for the sake of not being a litter lout compared to the cost of keeping a horse...




Well, testimonial or not, I find it hard to belive that that thing would work effectively on a moving saddle horse. It might catch some, but I doubt it would catch all. I've seen similar carriage versions, and they seem to work better (attached to the carriage, not the back of the horse, like a scoop), although to me they are also unneccessary, given the low volume of horse carriage traffic in even a city like York, where we have tourist cabs.

If you don't like the thought of a bit of horse poo, and don't have the wit to avoid it, I suggest not riding in the countryside, really I don't understand (or ok, don't agree with) your stance. It isn't litter, any more than roadkill is litter, or for that matter the poo of wild animals. What next, deer to wear nappies? Wild animals to make sure they die neatly under hedges out of the way? Leaves to fall in autumn into special bins?


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

jashburnham said:


> They make damn good eating though. Off to Switzerland in March and am looking forward to a tucking into a nice horse steak!



Ooh, never (knowingly) had horse, would like to try it...


----------



## 4F (29 Jan 2008)

linfordlunchbox said:


> One for dogs also just in case the owners forget to scoop ?



But surely the point here is that dog owners can already be prosecuted for not cleaning up the mess, why should horse riders be any different ?


----------



## Arch (29 Jan 2008)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> But surely the point here is that dog owners can already be prosecuted for not cleaning up the mess, why should horse riders be any different ?



Because dog poo is a far greater threat to human health than horse poo. Also, the problem of dog poo is much greater (more dogs in urdan areas, especially parks where children run about and fall over) than horse poo on a road, which is generally clearly visible and avoidable and in a place where few children ought to be playing.


----------



## 4F (29 Jan 2008)

I agree that dog poo is unacceptable and totally agree that owners should be fined if they do not clear it up but I still think horse riders should have more of a duty to clear up as well.


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

User said:


> Because horse manure does not pose a significant threat to public health - dog mess does.



How significant a threat does dog mess represent? I remember when do mess first became an issue 20 years or so ago there was one publicised case I remember of a lad who lost his eyesight due to worms. As far as I know horses are as liable to parasites as dogs.

I think what we have here are horse riders who would disagree with takeaway wrappers being dropped at random but seem to think its perfectly acceptible to drop horse crap on the road. 

Then we have a few people like me. I see no good arguement for their behaviour as far as Im concernced sh!t covered streets should be a thing of the past. I havent seen a single post here that has convinced me in anyway that it should be socially acceptible to drop crap all over roads but not to throw other forms of litter around.

To my mind its purely selfish cant be bothered to do anything about it, as long as Ive had my pleasure.

No big deal, we all have our vices 

As a side note though I disagree just as strongly with red light jumping cyclists who "hurt no one" pavement riders who "pose little danger to the public" etc etc. I also disagree with cyclists knocking off wing mirrors even though I can understand the temptation at times.

But I am quite happy to pay out for a computer with far higher than necesary power consumption in order to experience the best of technology... Im happy to run 1000-2000watt lighting for painting and photography depending on what im doing. My own hobbies have detrimental affects as well


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> I agree that dog poo is unacceptable and totally agree that owners should be fined if they do not clear it up but I still think horse riders should have more of a duty to clear up as well.



Id agree completely


----------



## davidtq (29 Jan 2008)

User said:


> Horse faeces does not contain a significant level of parasites or other organisms likely to be injurous to human health. In part this is because they are herbivores.
> 
> Dogs on the other hand are carnivores, and their faeces do contain significant numbers of organisms that are injurous to human health.



Thats simply not true ascarid worms which were the nasties that affected kids eyes are present in horses as well. I think what we are hearing here is want to believe and make believe I'd prefer some more science rather than I say it so its so...

http://www.infohorse.com/worms.asp

http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/ygbriefs/h238manure-dog-cat.html

looks like the same parasites acting in the same way to me.

Thats not to say I have ANY scientific knowledge on droppings contents canine or horse, but if you're making a claim that dog faeces are dangerous and horse ones arent perhaps YOU could explain exactly what parasites that dogs have that are dangerous that horses dont also have.


----------



## Arch (30 Jan 2008)

Yes, only some animal diseases are easily transferable to humans - we call them zoonoses. Even if animals suffer from a similar germ or parasite (broadly for example 'worms'), it may well be specific to species. It's the reason you can eat lamb or beef rare, but must cook pork thoroughly - because pigs carry more diseases transmissible to humans - probably because they are, like us, omnivores, and therefore have similarities of digestive tract etc. Which is probably one reason why pork is a taboo meat to Judaism and Islam - in a hot climate, it's less likely to keep safely.


----------



## Maz (30 Jan 2008)

Arch said:


> Yes, only some animal diseases are easily transferable to humans - we call them zoonoses. Even if animals suffer from a similar germ or parasite (broadly for example 'worms'), it may well be specific to species. It's the reason you can eat lamb or beef rare, but must cook pork thoroughly - because pigs carry more diseases transmissible to humans - probably because they are, like us, omnivores, and therefore have similarities of digestive tract etc. Which is probably one reason why pork is a taboo meat to Judaism and Islam - in a hot climate, it's less likely to keep safely.


Being muslim, I think you're right about the climate thing and prohibition of pork for muslims and jews. 
I'm not quite sure about this - never really looked into it - but it's also got to do with some funky deal going down with the physiology of pigs and humans being very similar (organ transplants from pigs to humans etc). Though, how they would know that back in Biblical times, god only knows.


----------



## Arch (30 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Being muslim, I think you're right about the climate thing and prohibition of pork for muslims and jews.
> I'm not quite sure about this - never really looked into it - but it's also got to do with some funky deal going down with the physiology of pigs and humans being very similar (organ transplants from pigs to humans etc). Though, how they would know that back in Biblical times, god only knows.



Yes, that does come into it as well - if you think about it, it doesn't take too much modern scientific knowledge to see that the digestive system of a cow is more different to a human than that of a pig, just good observation - and I'm sure human anatomy was fairly well known just from seeing people sliced open in battles and stuff. Ancient people may not have understood the chemical processes and the microscopic detail, but basic anatomy is a case of good observation.

There are other very sensible reasons for a taboo on pork - pigs will happily eat excrement of any sort and root about in rubbish heaps so there's a much higher chance of human parasites being re-ingested.

Finally, there's a purely practical aspect - pigs can be sensitive to sunburn, and like to have mud to wallow in. And their feet aren't as tough as those of bovids, so they perhaps aren't so well suited to a nomadic life of the sort desert pastoralists often have. It all goes to show, there are very good reasons indeed for a lot of the rules we may now see as arcane.


----------



## Maz (30 Jan 2008)

Can you imagine Moses just having received the 10 commandments and then hears a voice:
"Oh, and, Moses, one more thing before you go..."
-Yes?
"Don't eat pork."
-What?!
"Don't eat pork. Bad meat. Dirty. Don't eat it."


Sorry if I offended anyone with that. I think it's funny.


----------



## Arch (30 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Can you imagine Moses just having received the 10 commandments and then hears a voice:
> "Oh, and, Moses, one more thing before you go..."
> -Yes?
> "Don't eat pork."
> ...



I'm thinking of Moses stomping off back down the mountain in a huff, chuntering to himself "Bloody typical, I get a nice pack of pork chops in for supper...."

I'm amused at some of the ways the medieval Christian church got round dietary restrictions, like the idea that you shouldn't eat meat, only fish, on a Friday, or in Lent. Apparently, the medieval bishops simply reclassifed a lot of animals as fish - seals, otters etc, because they 'lived in water'. And even animal foeteses - because they came from a watery environment.. Talk about stretching it a bit. And I believe the Barnacle Goose is so named because, being migratory, people believed that when it disappeared for a season, it had in fact turned into a barnacle (there is a reason why a barnacle, I can't remember it). And hey, that meant it was really a fish!


----------



## Maz (30 Jan 2008)

Nice one, Arch. In that case ducks are fish, too. Weeeeeel, they might as well be, the amount of time they spend in water.
Peking duck is already fish!


----------



## Arch (30 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Nice one, Arch. In that case ducks are fish, too. Weeeeeel, they might as well be, the amount of time they spend in water.
> Peking duck is already fish!




Um. Do you mean Bombay duck?


----------



## Maz (30 Jan 2008)

Arch said:


> Um. Do you mean Bombay duck?


Aye! That's the fella. My mistake.


----------



## Arch (30 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Aye! That's the fella. My mistake.




I suppose now, it's Mumbai duck...

Dammit, the thought of Peking duck has set off my chinese takeaway craving.


----------



## gambatte (30 Jan 2008)

Maz said:


> Can you imagine Moses just having received the 10 commandments and then hears a voice:
> "Oh, and, Moses, one more thing before you go..."
> -Yes?
> "Don't eat pork."
> ...



Why is my mental image of Moses very similar to Homer Simpson?

D'oh!


----------



## Rhythm Thief (31 Jan 2008)

Arch said:


> Um. Do you mean Bombay duck?



Why can't you get Bombay Duck any more? They used to sell it years ago in a curry house I used to frequent, but since they stopped selling it I can't find it anywhere. It's delicious.


----------

