Reading the above posts made me remember something I'd not thought about for decades.
When I was young, there was a flurry of reports of "assaults" on horses (some of which were found dead) in Hampshire, England.
The police (Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary) launched "Operation Mountbatten", named for one of the dead horses, to collect information and "stake out" areas to catch offenders (none were ever caught- or even seen).
I wonder if some of the causal mechanisms of mutilation- and the local community responses- might be (loosely) analogous to what's been reported in cattle mutilations in the US.
There are cattle in England of course, but there aren't the vast ranches to be found in America, Canada, Australia etc.
-Would add, Hampshire is unusual in having New Forest ponies, which are basically feral (they are owned, but roam free- once a year they are rounded up for checks, de-worming and branding; frail animals are kept in for care over winter if necessary).
I don't know if any of the reported assaults involved Forest ponies, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Anyway, remembering "Op Mountbatten" I
did some in-depth research googled it- and this came up:
"Horse ripper fears are false, says researcher", Steven Morris, 23/04/01,
The Guardian:
External Quote:
Most mutilations of horses which have been blamed on sadistic attackers are in reality caused by accidents or by other animals, a leading member of a charity for horses claimed yesterday.
The theory put forward by Ted Barnes, a field officer for the International League for the Protection of Horses, will upset many who believe their animals were the victims of "horse rippers".
But Mr Barnes, who has spent 20 years investigating apparent attacks, insists that the widely held view that there are gangs of sadists with a fetish for mutilating the sexual organs of horses is a myth. He said that in most of the cases he had examined, injured horses probably had been involved in an accident and then had aggravated their wounds or been attacked by another animal after death.
Mr Barnes, former head of the Metropolitan police's equine crime unit, said: "When a mare is in season she will do the most ridiculous things. She will rub her back end on a gatepost. She might start by nicking herself on a sharp object. She will try to relieve that by continuing the rubbing and inflict the most horrendous injuries on herself. She would not stop because she sees blood. Horses do not have the same interpretation of pain as human beings."
Mr Barnes added that a lot of injuries he had seen were almost certainly caused after the death of the horse. He said: "Very alarming-looking injuries can be caused. If a vet is not sure of the explanation for a horse's death, quite rightly he tells the owner to contact the police. But another problem is that because these reports are relatively rare, the officers concerned have little experience investigating them.
"The problem is that because it involves genitalia, people assume it is being done by a pervert." He conceded that a "handful" of attacks probably had been carried out by a sadist, but he claimed the problem had been blown out of proportion in the closely knit equine community.
"Horse-ripping" has been known since medieval times. It was the subject of Peter Shaffer's play Equus (1973), in which a boy is examined by a psychiatrist to find out why he put out the eyes of horses with an iron spike.
In Britain, the police and animal experts have speculated that fertility cults, rival horse owners and sadists could be behind attacks.
External Quote:
Hampshire's police launched Operation Mountbatten after scores of attacks were reported, but no convictions were made. The force's officers are still convinced a horse ripper was at large.
The Mountbatten team established, however, that the horses were not drugged. This led them to postulate that the "mutilators" were used to working with horses. But the fact that horses were not drugged may add credence to Mr Barnes's theory that most mutilations are accidental or happen after a horse's death.
Link:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/apr/23/stevenmorris
I'm not sure the "in season" behaviour is particularly relevant to cattle mutilations, but the "attack by another animal after death", and "...almost certainly caused after the death of the horse" might be.
Mr Barnes statement about genitalia being involved also resonates with the Madison County Sheriff's Office statement.
I suspect the undeniable evidence of genital damage in some of these cases taps into some deeper unease common to many of us- "UFO abductees" sometimes report their captors as having great interest in human reproduction, as well as conveying warnings about less personal sources of angst- nuclear weapons, pollution, etc.
If there are similar causes for some US "cattle mutilations" and some English "horse-ripping", I think it's interesting how at least some people in two different communities have interpreted them.
In the USA, there are fears of covert specimen gathering or experimentation- perhaps by the Government, or even ETIs.
In England, people are convinced there are sex-maniacs roaming the countryside, or even
External Quote:
doing terrible things to horses.
...I guess it pays detectives to keep an open mind, but
really?!
I'm in a soppy mood tonight, so just to prove they exist here are some (healthy and happy) New Forest ponies, in Hampshire.
as even the satanists aren't sex perverts (in regards to the animals) , they just use the parts for rituals.
It's fairly taboo over here in the UK as well!
