Brian Travis invaded by bureaucrats

[Lloyd Danforth]

The half of dozen Freestaters involved may experience some thud but the hundreds of others won't be effected.

Hey!  Horse Community!  Its the Fucking 21st Century!

[stanford]

FWIW, I was planning to keep the relationship between Beth and the farm to ourselves. That is, until she started maligning Heidi, and now me. We have a saying, "what goes on the farm stays on the farm". Apparently, Beth didn't believe in that rule.

But now that you brought up brewers grains... As part of the brewing process, grains are boiled to release their carbohydrates. The water containing these carbohydrates is used in the fermentation process to make alcohol. I'm fortunate to be an invester in Manchester Brewing, which gives us these grains after they are processed. Breweries around the world sell these "spent grains" to farmers and food processors, which use them in many products. Although there are not much carbs left, there are a ton of beneficial minerals and other goodies, like protein, present.

There are a lot of articles on the use of brewers grains. Here's one I found quickly:

http://www.engormix.com/use_of_by_product_e_articles_1082_CAB.htm

Brewer's grains

Dried brewer's grain is a by-product of the brewing industry that results from drying mash solids. Brewer's grains have been used as part of horse rations for many years. The expected protein content is around 22%, which is intermediate between crude protein concentration in grains and protein supplements such as soybean meal. It is relatively high in crude fat (9%) as compared with grains, and although moderately variable, is similar in energy content to high-quality oats.


Many grain products use pellitized feed product starts with brewers grains. Here's one:
http://www.immuneone.com/feed.html

A NATURAL FOR HORSES. The protein from brewers' dried grains and malt sprouts is more readily digestible through the entire digestive system than is protein from single vegetable protein sources. Previous tests have shown that malt sprouts give the same accelerated growth as seen with antibiotic supplementation. The results: Improved efficiency and performance in all phases of breed production, training, race or show.


Plus, unless you are a very large farm, you are probably buying grains off the shelf, which may have been sitting around for a while, during which the nutritional value decreases. Manchester Brewing gets the best grains available from all over the world in order to make our delicious beer. We pick up the grains directly from the brewery and feed it to the horses fresh.

So I get to do a little schoolin' on brewers grains, and plug the best beer in New Hampshire, all at the same time. So if you want to help our horses, buy more beer from Manchester Brewing!

[Sam A. Robrin]

There is about to be a very loud thud across the free state group and the horse community

And I get accused of making threats . . . !

[AntonLee]

so even when I'm being most skeptical of Brian and the family's side (when I'm deciding to try and think like a statist, to step into another's shoes). . . even the best arguments for abuse have been answered to my satisfaction.

And, that's me. . . a non-horse person.  A layman.  A person who knows dick about horses.  Where is the abuse?  Where is the proof?

This loud 'thud' is sounding more and more like a 'thud' of bureaucrats and statist types coming down on someone for being different or using different methods.  I hope someday, that some rich types don't get together with people in government and decide to regulate things I like to do.  Heaven forbid I treat my property differently than the blue blood busy body types. 

Rockin?  Not hardly. . . more like Rolling, as in on the tracks to the camp.

[Russell Kanning]

There is about to be a very loud thud across the free state group and the horse community

And I get accused of making threats . . . !

I guess he came back ... even though we are forum nazis.
I wonder what will cause the thud .... where will it occur? ... how far away will it be heard?
I am getting excited.

[AntonLee]

I just heard the thud.  It was really loud like a bomb went off.  Oh no wait that was Steve Sprowl sitting down.

[xyz]

Very interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_hoarding#Characteristics_of_a_hoarder

[Dave Ridley]

uh...the horse community in new hampshire did an inspiring job beating back a potential tax on them.  They were even more impressive than the gun lobby from what I heard.  So were their results. 

I wonder if the idea of an alliance between horse owners and general-liberty activists may have been perceived as a political threat to some in power.

[mongo]

I beg to differ. Our entire system of property forfeiture and seizure laws is based upon medieval practices, which include trying pigs, carts, horses, etc. for crimes. Sometimes, the animals were killed; others, they were given as property to the victor in the contest.  Sense is right out. Do children have rights? Perhaps a few, like the right not to be killed, but not the right of free speech, at least in this country. The charge of vagrancy is directly descended from the law against going about a masterless man. Do you have a right to travel? Then why have a drivers license? A license is the King's permission to do that which is otherwise forbidden.

My point is not that there are no laws, or no rights written down on scraps of paper, or not that Heavenly Father will not give you your own planet outside Utah if you've been particularly polite. Rather, I am making the claim that something so nebulous as a concept incapable of defending itself is no more than mere whimsy; and infinitely changeable to suit the powers that be---mere privilege, i.e. private law, enforced by hired guns. I know that most of us believe that we SHOULD be able to appeal to our rights---but I declare thee an Enemy Combatant, a Terrorist, a Witch! And so you have nothing but a fistful of dust after all.

The animal rights question is about legal rights, not natural rights. No animals, be they horses, pygmy ponies, toads, raccoons, or mosquitos have any legal rights. This is because animals can't read, and they can't understand the laws of man. There is no sense in arresting a duck for jaywalking. Animals are simply beyond the law. Giving animals legal rights makes no more sense than outlawing floods.

It could be argued that in NH, horses, by law, have the right to adequate food, water, and shelter. The intent of the law is certainly that they be provided with those things. But the law confers no rights to horses. It places responsibilities on the owners, who are subject to the laws of man. The law is about animal welfare, not animal rights.

[MistyBlue]

hello all, new here. Not here to cause waves, but would like to point out inconsistencies.

Beth, I can see that you are interested in horses. That's what attracted me to you. I hired you last summer to care for Heidi's horses. You are the caretaker, as you mentioned in the video where Cooper was arrested for not allowing the government on the property. You built the fences and organized a work crew to build shelter for the horses. While Heidi was working full-time your job was to care for the horses on the farm.

First, poor form taking Beth to task over this. Second...
*She was hired last *summer* and yet during the summer there wasn't any time to properly install fencing knowing up to 30 horses were coming? You had stated in videos and print that there wasn't time to build fences since the move and horses arrived in November. yet you were there and a caretaker was there in summer. Why no fencing and more than a few small run ins?
*Beth built the fences? Or you did? Or professionals did? Because so far you have personally stated three possible theories for how the fences ended up on the property. In video you stated you personally built the fences and they fell down. Then Heidi staes in same video that professionals were hired to build fences. (if pros built the fencing seen in the video I hope they weren't paid) Now you're saying the poor fencing is entirely Beth's fault. Which is it?
*You personally stated in video and more than once online that you brought two businesses to NH and Heidi didn't have a job and couldn't find one. Heidi didn't have funds to care for the horses for some time due to lack of a job and that's why she asked a local rescue to take up to 10, they took 3. So how is it Beth was hired last *summer* to care for the horses while Heidi was working full time?

At some point between then and now, the horses in your care were deemed by that government to have improper care, and they were seized by that government.

*When you hire a caretaker/farm manager they do not use their own funds to support *your* animals. Beth could only work with whatever funds you or Heidi gave her. If neither of you provided enough funds to properly feed or support these animals it's hardly Beth's fault.

You mention that you are glad to be caring for the babies at LeBlanc's farm. Those same babies have been here for you to care for since last summer. Did you have the same pleasure caring for them while they were here, in your care, before the government seized them?

She cared for them to the best of her ability given the seriously substandard living conditions the horses' owners provided and the funds they also provided. She's happier caring for them now most likely because it's a pleasure to care for animals and rehab them back to health when they're in a decent environment with decent food and decent funds to provide both.

Except now, Heidi has been charged with the crime of neglecting horses that were under your care.

As you've stated ad nauseum and is definitely correct, Heidi is the owner of the horses. It's the owner's responsibility of care when it gets down to legal definition. Is this an admission that the horses seized were indeed in very poor shape and it's now Beth's fault they were this way? or are you still standing by your oft repeated "they were healthy: statements as here in newspaper, direct quote from you:

He said the horses are perfectly healthy and alleged they were taken because of a dispute with Steve Sprowl of the NHSPCA.

Then there's the blatant flip flops on the shelter statements:
Quote from you from newspaper this March:

Travis said he was not aware of the law, or that he was in violation of it, until he received a search warrant on Monday

And yet you stated this yourself on this BB back in November 08:

Nov 6 08:Here's an update. Steve Sprowl, the SPCA investigator, finally called me back today and said that all he wanted to do is to check out the sheds as required by law. I assured him that our very expensive racehorses were well taken care of. I explained that the "Animal Cruelty Officer" from the town next door visited a couple months ago and reminded me that there was a "law" that required shelter between November 15th and April 15th. I told the cop then that I was aware of that rule of theirs. Their law actually says November 1st. Of course, I was supposed to be aware of this law by the mere fact that I was born?

So you weren't aware at all? And November wasn't even your first time being told of the shelter law...a few months before November you were also told. Why? No horses there yet supposedly. So you state you weren't aware of the rule, but you also state you were aware of the rule and were told a couple months before November, again in November. And neither of those times did you think to do a 30 second Google search to get the exact wording on the NH shelter law that states in full each horses must have a 10x10 3 sided covered area? Took me 30 seconds to find that info since I'm not in NH. After two warnings it never occured to you to check that since you've also stated you would have been happy to comply had you only been told/known.
Even Ms Paradis told you or Heidi at the time you were asking for their help that you needed more/better shelter:

Teresa Paradis, founder and director of the Live and Let Live Farm, a non-profit rescue shelter for horses in Chichester said she received a call for help from Fredrick about six weeks ago.
Fredrick originally talked about sending nine or 10 horses to the farm because of financial difficulties.


She said she gave Fredrick some advice on shelters that needed repair.
"They seemed like very concerned people in a bad situation," Paradis said. "They did not seem set up for 25 horses."

So now that's THREE different people telling you that better shelters were needed for the health of the horses, for the type of winter NH gets and to comply with the welfare laws. yet you still claimed you had NO idea...
Even you admitted the shelters were inadequate in a newspaper quote:

He also said some areas had been temporarily crowded while new shelters were being built,

The videos show even more flip flops on what the actual truth might be.
In the video by Mefeedia you stated in an interview at approximately 19:55 into the video that the horses "always had feed, always had grain, always had dewormer." Yet in the RipleyReport video Part One Heidi states at 2:06 minutes that they had grain a few days per week when you could afford it. You also stated somewhere else that all young horses have worms and Heidi had just started taking care of that. So apparently it wasn't "always." Not to mention Ms Paradis said 6 weeks prior to March 11th that Heidi contacted her about not having enough money to feed her horses or enough feed for them, yet you state they always had hay and feed and you spent $10k-$15k on hay. If Heidi had no money for hay in late January or so...wasn't she working full time as you stated? Or why wasn't the excess funds that can be found for attorneys used to buy feed instead of pawning horses off onto rescues who are *always* lacking funds and who do good work...obviously so since you were contacting them. Is this the personal responsibility that goes with personal rights?

Heidi also states in that video that her horses are all trained and not unhealthy...yet heavy worm loads, the video evidence of their weight and the fact that they are now learning how to be halter trained and have their feet handled states that that wasn't exactly true either. And please do not point out the comment at 5:40 minutes where you indicate that the SPCA may very well be neglecting and not feeding yoour horses to later prove starvation/emaciation. You may not realize this...or you may be hoping the folks on this BB don't know this...but it takes extreme lengths of time being poorly fed or unfed before horses even look like the clipped babies in the video already released. There is no possible way they could have lost that much weight in the couple weeks they were there. Mother Nature designed grazing animals to lose weight slowly and gain it quickly...otherwise most would be extinct every time there was a drought in history. BTW...rescue horses near emaciation can easily gain upwards of 100 lbs per month when fed an adequate amount of quality food and have had the worms removed from them. They're genetically designed to do so.
As for the claims that neither of you had any idea that Coggins was necessary to cross state lines...that would be akin to stating that a lifetime horse owner didn't know what a saddle was. There is no legal way Heidi could have raced those horses, had them even on racetrack grounds, shown those horses or sold any out of state without a current Coggins test done. Coggins is excessively important to the equine world...it's a test for EIA and that disease spreads like wildfire over enormous distances and is deadly. Not "many may die" but deadly in the most serious way. There isn't a vaccine for it and it's spread by insects. To bring 29 horses into a new state...if even one was carrying that (a few horses carry but never get it, but they can pass it on) you could have decimated the bulk of equines in that ENTIRE state. That is NOT a private property issue. So there isn't any way on God's green earth Heidi did not know that.

As less interesting speaking mistakes...describing the horses as very expensive race horses is not going to help when an enormous portion of horses owners can look that up online in about 3 minutes with their race and breed associations. Race horses who are expensive are only the ones who have actually ever raced or won. I'll leave it at that.

Please leave Beth out of this...she;s done more for the FSP than this fiasco ever will. The blatant contradictions everyone is seeing via your love of media/online is making the entire FSP look like a bunch of conspiracy theorists who happen to lie an awful lot. I "know" Beth from another BB...not personally but she's always been respected on there. She's mentioned rights more than once and gotten quite a few horse owner interested in learning more.

And D.Orwell on here makes an excellent point...the equine industry and community is enormous and can be quite powerful when influencing local and national governments. I lobby for it myself quite heavily. We've gone against the uninformed sheep of the majority countless times and have a heavy win record. We're just quiet about it. Because frankly...quiet and humble is what works. Not loud and obnoxious. If you want to beat the government at it's own game (and who doesn't in most cases?) then learn how to play the game so you can win more than you lose.
And those on here mentioning the ridiculous fiasco that is Animal Rights...they couldn't be more right. It's a mess...a big media-whore mess. But a word to the wise...you will *never* get the majority of anyone to listen to you if you rant or even mention that it's okay to neglect, starve or torture living property. Animal Rights may be a bunch of ignorant asshats but animal welfare is a MAJOR concern even for people who don't own animals. Animals are property 100%...yet they are considered "the same but separate" if you ever want any support of any kind.

[KBCraig]

uh...the horse community in new hampshire did an inspiring job beating back a potential tax on them. 

A bill sponsored by one of their own, who assumed the "horse community" would "want to help out".

[dalebert]

Very interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_hoarding#Characteristics_of_a_hoarder

Effing troll. Making a new anonymous account so you can drop one little comment from the peanut gallery.

[stanford]

Boy, someone's been doing their research! How many times did you have to read every post I've written, watch every video I've been in, listen to every radio interview and, apparently been privy to every thought I've had. Impressive! I wish I had that kind of free time! [edit: I just found out that MistyBlue is an alias used by Beths' sister, Gail]

Just a couple of points. I've learned things since this whole fiasco started. You are reading/watching/listening to/channeling information that I've written/taped/recorded/thought as some facts were known and others weren't yet known. To say there are inconsistencies across time is certainly accurate. That's the nature of breaking news. Do you expect a newspaper to go back and correct last week's article when new information comes to light today? It would be nice if I had all facts on every facet of this case that were known and yet to be known in the future. That way, I'd be able to be more consistent. But if I had that information, I'd probably just play the lottery.

Second, it's not my job to be fair and unbiased. All parties will spin the facts to fit their needs. The internet has given the little guy more power than ever before to compete with the one-sided media that we've had for the past couple hundred years. We all use words to put the best light on the stories we tell. Who hasn't worn perfume or cologne to cover up or enhance certain odiferous facts?

Third, I do like talking in front of a camera, but I would much prefer to do it on my own schedule. They brought this fight to us. We just want to be left alone. The symbol of the Free State Project is the porcupine. A friendly, reclusive little critter that minds its own business. Until you mess with it. The Culpeper Minutemen used a rattlesnake for the same effect.

Finally, I totally agree with your closing remark. "Animals are property 100%". If people actually believed that, we would never have gotten into this mess. Heidi would be able to deal with her property as she saw fit, and the busybodies wouldn't be able to invoke the violence of the government to force others to do what they think is right.

So can we start with that common ground and see if there are other things we can agree on?

[Peacemaker]

(Beth, I think it was good you had your say and got this monkey off your back.  I wish we weren't waiting for the Courts and could get it all out and over with so everyone could move on, once again the "speed" of Gov. does not impress).

As an animal lover, I don't think it gets any more difficult for me in cases where there may be animal neglect/abuse.  In a totally Free Market,  I think the few cases of Real Animal Neglect that actually would happen (please don't post the total #'s because I don't trust Humane Society numbers and I used to Volunteer for them) would be far outweighed by the abundance of aid & resources that would be availale in a True Free Market System for animals from "all walks." 

To Initiate the Use of Physical Force, against Any Peaceful Individual's Life &/or their Property (also = their life) when they have not Aggressed against anyone, is a Crime in an Honest and truly Free Society (if the neighbors saw a baby being beaten, don't worry, they'd storm the place!)

Protection of Private Property is Paramount (there can be no compromise).  And in a Free Society, the most fantastic thing exists:
Individuals actually get to Own their Own Lives.  Imagine that.

[MistyBlue]

Boy, someone's been doing their research! How many times did you have to read every post I've written, watch every video I've been in, listen to every radio interview and, apparently been privy to every thought I've had. Impressive! I wish I had that kind of free time! [edit: I just found out that MistyBlue is an alias used by Beths' sister, Gail]

Oddly enough I am really not that enamored of you to have done any of those things repeatedly. I mentioned that I lobby...which means scads of research constantly. I also have a somewhat photographic memory for inconsistencies in facts since that's pretty much what I do all day. You've been extremely inconsistent and contradict yourself often.
I am not related to Beth...if you searched at all you'd see that I am some of the same equine related BBs that she is. I am in another state though and not related at all. If you had researched at all online you'd see that's very evident that we're not related. I use the same screen name online everywhere.

Just a couple of points. I've learned things since this whole fiasco started. You are reading/watching/listening to/channeling information that I've written/taped/recorded/thought as some facts were known and others weren't yet known. To say there are inconsistencies across time is certainly accurate. That's the nature of breaking news. Do you expect a newspaper to go back and correct last week's article when new information comes to light today? It would be nice if I had all facts on every facet of this case that were known and yet to be known in the future. That way, I'd be able to be more consistent.

Unfortunately this is inane. As facts were known to YOU? You did not know any of your own inconsistencies. You had no idea who actually built the fence until someone else told you? When you stated you built the fences you had no idea you didn't? When you claim you spent $____ on hay you had no idea you didn't do that? When you stated the horses got hay and grain always all the time you had no idea they didn't when you were standing next to Heidi as she said different on camera? When 3 different people told you between summer and November in 2008 that your shelters were inadequate and not legal you had no idea that they had done so when you claimed nobody told you anything about shelters until March? Even though it's been your own words stating these facts? I could go on listing the lies....or you could inform people that you have an extremely shoddy memory. Or that you've been skewing facts in order to get the most false support possible or the most fawning over you possible. Or maybe just the most free labor possible?

Second, it's not my job to be fair and unbiased. All parties will spin the facts to fit their needs. The internet has given the little guy more power than ever before to compete with the one-sided media that we've had for the past couple hundred years. We all use words to put the best light on the stories we tell.

Nobody asked you to be fair or biased. Telling the truth would be a refreshing change though. The internet has given the narcistic among us the spotlight they crave...and many take that spotlight and blatantly lie in order to garner more attention for oneself. Spin isn't the same as lying...take that from someone who lobbies.

Finally, I totally agree with your closing remark. "Animals are property 100%". If people actually believed that, we would never have gotten into this mess. Heidi would be able to deal with her property as she saw fit, and the busybodies wouldn't be able to invoke the violence of the government to force others to do what they think is right.

People do agree with that in the majority. Just in degrees since animals are living property and all living things feel pain and can be abused or neglected. Heidi has been dealing with her property as she sees fit. It's gotten her in trouble more than once. Civil disobedience can be a wonderful tool...for inanimate causes. There isn't a state in this country that will tolerate neglect on Heidi's and your level. As for invoking the violence of the government...can you be more dramatic? Nobody drew a pentagram on the ground, lit candles and pleaded for the SPCA to come care for the animals she's been starving. I did not see any violence in the videos...and it wasn't done at the point of a gun. I happen to be extremely pro-firearms and the drivel I read on here from a few members is the type of dramatics that makes the saner of us look bad to the community.
Please feel free to do a search on my username...you'll see me quite a few places equine related online. You'll also see I am in no way related to Beth, nor have I ever met her. I'd appreciate not being called a liar when I stated that I didn't know her personally I meant that. I, unlike you, do not lie. You'll see I'm pro-firearms and a firearms instructor and competitor, a wildlife rehabber, and lobby for the equine industry. Not hard to find at all.
Is this the way folks are treated here? If you don't run with the mob being completely uninformed or if you come on here and point out the lies told so as to inform the rest of the people on here  then you are accused of lying yourself? Way to spin it.