Brian Travis invaded by bureaucrats

[Jan]

Woman: Tough call reporting sick horses

By GRETYL MACALASTER
Union Leader Correspondent
6 hours, 21 minutes ago


CANDIA – Horses or housing. That was the choice Beth Golomb was left with last month when her employers ignored repeated warnings that their horses were in danger.

Last month, she reported unhealthy, underweight and unsheltered horses at the 456 Critchett Road property where she rented from and was employed to care for the horses by the property's owner Brian Travis and his wife Heidi Fredrick.

Two weeks later, the property was raided by Candia police and the New Hampshire Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Fredrick was charged for lack of proper shelter and animal cruelty.

Fredrick has pleaded not guilty to all charges and her trial is scheduled for July 22.

The search and arrest warrants in the case were sealed to protect Golomb's identity but were released to the New Hampshire Union Leader yesterday.

Golomb's name had already made the rounds on Free State Project Web sites after the warrants were released as discovery to Fredrick's defense attorney.

Golomb and Travis are both members of the Free State Project which promotes personal freedom and minimal government involvement in personal issues.

As such, Golomb faced a tough decision when she was unable to convince Fredrick to provide adequate resources to properly care for the horses. But this time, she felt she had no choice, she said.

Her eyes filled with tears as she recounted the difficult decisions that she made.

"I really tried my hardest not to go this route. I made attempts, the horse community made attempts and it fell on deaf ears," Golomb said. "I did this because I wanted what is best for the horses "... I felt like if I didn't stand up and do what I did for these horses, nobody was going to."

Golomb said she watched as donations and help from other local horse people were shunned, including offers of blankets and grain.

As time went on, Golomb and Fredrick's relationship became more difficult and Golomb again started communicating with Travis, who had originally hired her to care for the horses before his wife moved to New Hampshire with him.

In January, Golomb was instructed by Travis to attempt to find new homes for the majority of the 30 horses then residing at the property.

But then Travis stopped responding to e-mails and Golomb watched helpless as some of the horses continued to starve.

Previously, when first considering Travis' offer of caring for the horses in exchange for free rent she thought it would be "awesome" she said.

Her friendship with Travis made it easy to work for him, but once Fredrick came to the state in November, things took a turn for the worse.

"It was hard for me to take care of the horses now that I was not dealing with Brian," Golomb said. "Heidi had a hard time communicating with me."

Golomb repeatedly informed Fredrick that they were low on supplies, that fences needed maintenance and that they needed to make more progress with the construction of shelters.

She said that Fredrick stopped returning e-mails and phone calls and that issues she raised about illness, injury or other problems were ignored.

"The horses did not have enough food and they were starting to whither away," Golomb said, her voice catching. "When I saw the offer of grain turned down, I said something is not right."

At the time, Golomb was keeping her own horse at the farm and worried for his safety. Other horses were breaking into her feed stores and Fredrick had overloaded the paddock where he was kept with other horses.

"I felt it was unfair to keep my horse in those conditions," Golomb said.

Golomb was connected with Joe LeBlanc, owner of Rockin' Horse Ranch in Raymond. She moved her horse to his stable and then started working there to pay for the board.

"I think the breaking point was when I started working here and realizing that these horses are in good condition, are well-kept, get daily care," Golomb said. "I can sleep well knowing my horse is here."

Golomb said she has since been evicted from Travis's property, but she does not regret her decision.

"They (the horses) received the necessary care and treatment they needed to become healthy horses again," Golomb said.

All 12 horses have been returned to Fredrick with stipulations for care.

[MistyBlue]

Racehorses are always ribby looking. The difference is; you can see the delineation of ribs due to the muscle surrounding those ribs because they're uber-fit. Kind of like someone being 5'10" and weighing 200 lbs as a regular joe means you couldn't see his ribs but someone 5'10" and a professional body builder has his rib muscles all visible. And then there's the third world country starving people who have visible ribs...that's what's comparable to those horses when they were removed. Those horses were not race or polo fit (polo is another sport that the horses are at a level of fitness rarely seen in other equine sports)...they were malnourished. Comparing young Arabian stock stuck in tiny pens without room to exercise and who weren't trained to be exercised outside of those tiny pens and weren't given adequate food or adequate shelter to keep whatever weight they had on by not using reserves to keep warm to uber-fit top racing stock that has it's supplements and feeds and even grass they graze tested and retested for nutritrional content and are in regular training programs is comparing apples to oranges.

The NHSPCA could have brought food and dewormer *IF* Brian or Heidi asked for help. They didn't. And they claimed repeatedly there wasn't anything wrong with their horses....so why ask for help? And why would they have accepted any food or dewormers if they thought nothing waas wrong with scrawny worm loaded horses?

And as we can see from the newest article...it seems food and help was offered from the equine community in that area. It was turned down. Heidi refused to speak to Beth also. So who actually cared about the animals? Sure as hell doesn't seem to be Heidi, who ignored repeated offers of help and who ignored repeated advice on their care and who ignored any pleas to release enough funds to care for those horses enough to keep them somewhat healthy.

[stanford]

Hmmm...

I can't really say much right now as we prepare for trial, but I can try to unspin some of this story.

The reason I asked Beth to find homes for some of the horses was because the caretaker wasn't taking care of the horses, and Heidi had to take up the slack. Heidi ended up donating three horses to a local rescue, which placed them right away.

I don't really know about me not responding to emails. In fact, the opposite is true. Beth responded very immaturely to normal employer criticism Heidi gave Beth when she wasn't doing her job, and the relationship went downhill. As a result, I had to get between the two warring factions and try to salvage the relationship. This is why Heidi "stopped returning e-mails and phone calls". I set the policy that they had to talk to each other face-to-face in order to avoid mis-communication.

During this time, Beth and I attempted to finalize our contract so all parties would know their responsibilities. It was Beth who stopped responding to questions about the contract.

I don't know anything about refusing offers of grain or blankets. I do know that Heidi just accepted a donation of a ton of grain from a farm in Maine. Plus, she gets lots of grain from Manchester Brewing. And there were plenty of blankets, if just we could have gotten the caretaker to put them on the horses. She refused to go near the colts and stallions.

Beth wasn't "evicted" from my property because she wasn't renting from me. I asked her boyfriend to remove the trailer from my property.

I banned Beth from my property because I don't want people near me who use the force of the state to solve their personal problems.

[MistyBlue]

Sounds like more spin than my washing machine as opposed to unspinning. 

Heidi was getting "lots of grain" from local breweries? And how was that working out for her? Because she stated in one of your own videos how she wasn't able to get or afford grain on a regular basis and could only feed it a couple times per week. I guess that's now changed? Again? And why accept a ton of grain from Maine (hey that rhymes) if the horses weren't in need of it as you both continually stated?

And you asked Beth to find homes for the horses you state she wasn't taking care of? Does that make sense to anyone else? Because it sure doesn't to me. Who asks the neglecting party to find homes for the animals they're neglecting?

And if you *just* accepted a donation of 2000 lbs of grain...does that mean you cannot afford the feed/care of that many horses? If you could afford it, why accept the donation? I hope not just because it's free...because otherwise it could have gone to someone who really needs it. If you can't afford it...then that speaks volumes about what actually happened...not being able to afford horses while owning 30 of them means they starve...and if they're starving because *you* couldn't afford feed, that's hardly Beth's fault now, is it?  But you were easily able to get LOTS of grain before? Well hell, which is it? This story makes zero sense.

Heidi had to take over the care? So who's responsible for the condition of the horses? Beth who wasn;t receiving enough funds to so or Heidi who had taken over the care? The owner is ultimately responsible BTW. You own it, it's your responsibility. If a caretaker isn't doing their job and you're giving them enough funds to do so....why ask that caretaker to rehome the horses? And why try to give away "many thousands of dollars of race stock?"

And still the contradictions of "there was nothing wrong with those horses!" stated repeatedly to changing it over really fast after the video of their actual conditions came to notice, "Well BETH wasn't caring for them, it's all her fault!" So which was it? Nothing wrong with the horses? Or emaciated animals that were the fault of Beth? It can't be both even though you've stated both so far.

None of that seems to make much sense considering what information has come directly from you and Heidi before. Just more contradictions. 

[Friday]

The reason I asked Beth to find homes for some of the horses was because the caretaker wasn't taking care of the horses, and Heidi had to take up the slack.

Pathetic.   

[stanford]

The reason I asked Beth to find homes for some of the horses was because the caretaker wasn't taking care of the horses, and Heidi had to take up the slack.

Pathetic.   

It sure is. You hire someone you trust to take care of your property, and you end up doing the work yourself.

[littlehawk]

Boy. It surely is a he-said/she-said event. I have read 2 completly different stories.
I do hope the truth comes out.

I have been around horses my entire life. I must say it would be quite a rarity for any horse owner to refuse free feed. As far as horses with exposed ribs? Take a drive anywhere in the nation and look at horses. This time of year horses are shedding and its quite common to see their ribs. Once pastures freshen up, the horses put their weight back on. (Out here, almost all horses have pasture grounds and are not confined to stables) 

Shelters? I can honestly tell you I have always built shelters for my horses. They never use them and I live out west in mountain country where storms can be very fierce. The horses seek natural shelter by rock outcroppings, thick trees, low culverts, alongside a building etc. It is my opinion that it makes a horse "heartier" by being able to climatize to weather conditons. Of course there are always the exceptions. (i.e a sick or injured horse, a young colt, expecting mare, etc and they need to be brought in or put by a wind-break.)

I always keep my horses on the lean side. A lean horse is a much healthier horse than an overweight one. Making a determination in regards to animal abuse and underweight conditions is often judgemental and difficult. Other cases are quite easy to determine.

Even if I think of the worstcase scenario (Mr Travis neglected to feed them properly and their were extremely overrun with worms) I still have disagree with how the "men with guns" handled this situation. Like I said before, if they really had the horses best interest in mind, they could have delivered hay and meds and gave Mr Travis a warning.

The troubling thing is that legal arenas, judges and uninformed jurors do not always make the right decision. Too many times, the legal system does not reveal truth and justice. The old saying applies, "How much justice can you afford?"   

Littlehawk

[Jan]

I haven't indicated my support or non-support for anyone involved in this thread.  Yet, I put a couple posts up and my karma gets dinged.  This thread is toxic...the closer anyone gets to it, the more contaminated you become.

[MistyBlue]

It sure is. You hire someone you trust to take care of your property, and you end up doing the work yourself.

Well, that would have meant the horses were cared for. They quite obviously were not. So caretaker couldn't care for them, owners wouldn't.

And if you were caring for themselves yourselves...why blame Beth for their condition? Which I'm still trying to figure out how they could be in that condition if obviously you've had lots of grain and they were perfectly fine according to both of you. Video and cameras don't seem to lie though...although they aren;t doing your side any favors so far.

Littlehawk, I know very few horse owners who would accept a ton of free grain if they were not in financial need of it and it was being offered as if I had no means of caring for my horses. I would redirect that grain to people/places that need the grain more than I do. Like a rescue. Like probably the rescue that took horses off my hands for me as a thank you to them. To do otherwise is like all those folks who go on the government dole who are capable of working.

So I'd have to assume if they accepted 2000 lbs of free grain, they cannot afford thier own horses. They also tried to give away a lot of "very valuable" horses...the same ones they insisted the SPCA was going to makes tons of money off of.   If they can't afford to feed them, why didn't they just sign them over to the SPCA and be done with it? Or did they want to make sure no quasi-government folks ended up with those horses even though they couldn't afford to feed them? So what then? Let the horses go downhill again...beg others to support your animals for you...anything to keep them from being fed and cared for by the government. Because hating the government counts more than the health and well being of the horses? And had they only gone to them in the first place and asked for help...the SPCA *would* have given them the stuff they needed to help care for their horses. Instead they tried to pawn a crapload off on already stretched rescues who do good work. Remember...they tried to give 10 to the rescue...the rescue only had room and finances for 3. So private rescue = good...SPCA = bad because they have government ties.

As for all horses coming out of winter ribby...I've worked in the equine world for more than 2 decades. I have *never* seen an adequately cared for horse lose weight just because it got cold out.And even emaciated ones like Heidi's were (they weren't just a tad ribby) but they had piss-poor management and care over the winter. I live in an extremely horsie area of CT...just going downtown to gas up the truck I drive by at least 15 horse properties and it's only 6 miles to downtown...no ribby horses. My two are on dirt turnout...no ribs. And why would Heidi's horses be ribby after winter? None were on grass turnout and relying on grass as nutrition. They were all kept crowded in small pens without grass. So it was up to the *owners* to make sure they got enough forage to keep up their weight and stay warm.

Even my neighbor's 32 year old blind mare came out of winter fat and sassy. And she has barely any teeth left. But adequate shelter meant she wasn't shivering off any weight and high quality food in large amounts kept her weight up. That's all it takes folks...they need access to shelter when they feel they need it and a lot of quality food...not moldy sunbleached no nutrition crap hay. It's not rocket science to keep horses. Good food, clean water available at all times, shelter available.

[Russell Kanning]

"I really tried my hardest not to go this route. I made attempts, the horse community made attempts and it fell on deaf ears," Golomb said. "I did this because I wanted what is best for the horses "... I felt like if I didn't stand up and do what I did for these horses, nobody was going to."

I wonder if Beth would go this route again.

[MaineShark]

To do otherwise is like all those folks who go on the government dole who are capable of working.

Um, no.  Taking something that is freely-given is not even vaguely related to taking funds that were extorted by the threat of violence.

So I'd have to assume if they accepted 2000 lbs of free grain, they cannot afford thier own horses.

Those of us who live in the real world often have situations where funds are tight on occasion.  I can afford my kids, but I have zero problem accepting hand-me-down clothing from friends and neighbors.  Once they outgrow it, I'll hand it off to others.  It's called "paying it forward."

To be blunt, you sound like someone who's independently wealthy, or otherwise has never had to think about day-to-day funds.  There was just magically always enough in the checking account to cover all your expenses, right?  Never got close to zero on that balance, right?  Never asked a friend to help you out because things were tight, one particular month, knowing full well that you would return the favor in an instant, were the situation reversed, right?

Because hating the government counts more than the health and well being of the horses?

Hating thugs with guns attacking innocent people counts infinitely more than the "health and well being" of any animal.

It's not rocket science to keep horses. Good food, clean water available at all times, shelter available.

Wait, I thought only folks with extra-special, super-secret training could tell if a horse was healthy.  You're contradicting yourself, here.  Which is it?

Joe

[J Leblanc]

Brian, do you believe all the bullshit that comes out of your own mouth.I have seen the emails from you and your wife .YOU NEED HELP.iF you go into a court room with this crap your going to look like a fool.If your attorney has a clue, he probably will tell you to cut a deal and run. When he gets ahold of your emails he's going to be pissed..Maybe we can post those next..Your better off keeping quite

[stanford]

So I'd have to assume if they accepted 2000 lbs of free grain, they cannot afford thier own horses.

I want to be your cell phone provider. Most people get the free phone instead of paying for it. But I guess you've never even gotten something on sale, because that would be an admission that you couldn't afford to pay full price. Puhleeze.

I asked Heidi about the free grain and blankets Beth mentioned in the article, and she can't think of when that might have occurred. I know that Heidi would never turn down anything free. She grew up Lutheran.

We'd like to know when and from whom this mysterious donation offer came from.

"Rebecca", I know you are just trying to look out for your sister Beth, but your responses are really getting ridiculous. You came on to this forum long before I found out that Beth was the one who called the government. You obviously knew it was Beth from the beginning, and you tried to impeach my credentials. You knew the truth and you were going on the offense, calling me out as a liar as I found out more about the case and what was behind it. I'm a big boy with pretty thick skin, so I can take it. I just want to make sure Heidi gets a fair chance at clearing her name, so I've been taking the arrows.

Because you knew who the traitor was you had me at a disadvantage. I toyed with you in the beginning, thinking it was amusing how you really have no idea what this forum is about. If you want to debate a 2 vs 3 on the Henniker scales, I'm sure there are a thousand forums where people give a shit.

This is about the appropriate use of government force and the unimaginative people who use that force.

OK. Your turn. Go ahead and respond with your too-long response that no one will read.

[Russell Kanning]

so did you guys get your horses back?

[NJLiberty]

Wow! I didn't realize offering somebody something because I thought they might be able to use or appreciate it was implying that they couldn't fend for themselves. I hope I haven't insulted anyone through the years by giving them some tomatoes, or strawberries, or such. I guess I better more careful with my excess garden produce next year and only give it to soup kitchens. Am I supposed to feel insulted because my cousin gave me some sand this year for my icy driveway? Or that my landlord offered me his excess mulch that has converted to compost under his tarp for my garden?

If someone came and offered you something you had a use for why would you not take it? How is accepting a gift from a friend anything like being a parasite on the government dole? It seems to me that someone offering something they personally own is a lot different than the government stealing from one person to give to another.

I don't know, maybe I just don't understand.

George