Not sure if this is animal abuse or not...

[Furrythighhighbootz]

Saw this on Facebook the other day that shows tattooed horses, it made me kinda sad....


Do you think this counts as animal abuse?
https://www.inkedmag.com/g/strength-through-ink-tattoos-for-horses/?utm_source=quadra4&%20utm_content=inf&ipp=3

[Momma Bird]

By current practices, I suppose not. By personal beliefs, definitely.


We bran cows, we tattoo cat ears and chip them, we tag all kinds of wild animals for tracking purposes. I suppose tattooing a horse would be not a far stretch.


Personally, I really do not believe we should be marking any animal. I know some would give reasons and arguments to support there claims, that's fine and I get it. But personally, if I where to take some random stranger off the street and tag them, or took a family member and tattooed them, I have no doubts I would face multiple charges in the court. I never understood why the same curtsy does not extend to animals.

[The Past]

Looks like the post link got an extra "http://" and that broke it. I'll fix that.

The article says they aren't real tattoos, only airbrushed, and using safe ink. I think it's pretty cool, as long as the guy knew what he was doing. But Momma bird does have a point about marking animals without permission, imo.

[Brisky]

I still can't open the link, but, it's a little bit of a tricky subject, indeed...

I mean, shure. Inking an animal is very likely, entirely out of their will. But, if it's like Evnamishko said, and the horse doesn't suffer from any pain, hinder, or health hazards, then I don't really see what's so terrible about it.

But, yes, marking cattle is indeed a lot worse, usually.

It's just such a shame that it's often required by law.

[Momma Bird]

@ Evnamishko


Thank you ! I just looked at the pictures the first time I had visited the site, but you pointing out it's airbrush work, I checked again and actually read it. Makes me feel better that they are not actually inking horses.


Back to the original question;


I actually am one of those "animal hippies" the article scoffed at, and my answer is still the same, I do not think we should be marking animals. However, if someone is airbrushing with SAFE paint that washes off and will have no long term health effects on the animal (both physical and emotional), then by all means. Who would I be to say that is wrong, especially when animal psychology is as complicated as humans. If pet and owner are having fun with it, all the more power to them.

[juliet]

He said he was doing it to boost the Horse's confidence, and if it worked then why would that be abuse? That's helping the horse.

"Recently Benjamin took his compressor and paint out to a stable and airbrushed a tattoo on a depressed horse.
[/size][/color]‘I love boosting a horses confidence with a custom tattoo 50 likes and ill tat a lion up. (airbrushed on not permanent) Peace,’ the artist wrote."[/font]

[Momma Bird]

There is an experiment that goes around where they mark one chicken with a red dot. They found that the other chicken will pluck at and kill the chicken with the dot because they perceive it as abnormality. I know chickens and horses likely have different social structures, however, it's just something to think about. Again, if it is a bounding activity between horse and owner, and it's not permanent with any form of pain or harmful paint, all the power to them.

[Albie]

The link is broken because it is missing the : after the http.  I don't know much about the subject to really say. 

[The Past]

No, the ":" is there. I think the site is set to not allow direct links for whatever reason.
Vosur found out it was the missing "s" in "https". Well, that mystery is sorted.

But yeah, I'd find it interesting if the horse thinks much of the paint. I figured they just roll with it, but animals are more intelligent and complex than we see from our perspective.