|
I am in the process of relocating
from Indiana to Pennsylvania. I planned to move my retired 21-year-old
Quarter Horse gelding as soon as I could find a property with enough
space to keep him at home. I was shocked to hear my realtor in
Pennsylvania say that keeping a single horse is considered inhumane, and
that you should have at least two horses. I don't agree, but would go
along and have two horses if that's how things are done out East. The
agent also advised me that some of the townships require a minimum
amount of land for each horse. This means I might not be able to find an
affordable place.
My question is: Why is it inhumane
to have just one horse? In Indiana, my horse was fine at my parents'
place with no other horses. Before that, we had my cousin's Shetland
pony with him from time-to-time in the winter. He seems healthy and
contented with or without company. If anything, I think he is happier
without that pushy little pony.-- Andy
Amazing coincidence. Just last year the
same issue came up when we were selling our home in Pennsylvania. We had
a two-acre lot with a pasture and one-horse run-in stall, which all met
township ordinances. I considered this arrangement an attractive selling
feature. With no hesitation, an agent advised me that the one-horse
property is no longer a humane option. "Horses are social
animals," she said, "and they go nuts if kept alone."
Of course it is true that horses are
social animals. For sure, established groups of horses which get along
well do appear to us to derive considerable benefit from the company of
their herdmates. A large percentage of those horses show signs of
discontent upon isolation from herdmates or from a particular companion.
But, it simply is not true that all single-kept horses "go
nuts" or appear socially deprived. By all objective measures of
health and behavior, a large majority of horses can do very well as an
"only horse." As you noticed with your horse, some appear to
do better alone than with another particular horse or horses. In fact,
the argument could be defended that many grouped horses face greater
challenges as a result of continuous, indiscriminant grouping and
regrouping practices.
So, in my opinion, your logic and
conclusions about your horse are correct. You know that he does well
alone, maybe better than with certain equine companions.
Your question prompted me to make a few
phone calls to township planners and administrative offices in Chester
County, as well as to the Pennsylvania state organizations and officials
involved in township planning. I learned that many townships do have
ordinances relating to the keeping of horses on small acreage. Each that
I talked with have a minimum acreage requirement, varying among
townships from two to five acres for the first horse, with additional
acreage for each additional horse. No one I spoke to has heard of the
lonely horse issue in the context of planning or ordinances. I also
called a trusted manager at a large regional real estate firm. He said
he had never heard of this concept. So, hopefully the myth soon will
fade. If any of our readers hear more about this concept, I would be
grateful if you pass it along.
|