Patricia N. Saffran, Check List for the NYC Council not to Vote for the Horse Drawn Carriage Ban

Just a friendly reminder that there are no logical reasons to vote for proposed Intro 943 to the ban the carriage horses from Central Park and force them into retirement, no matter what their age. At present, the NY City Council is purportedly conducting a “feasibility study” on axing the industry, but it’s already accurate to say there is no feasibility possible. The ban will bankrupt and create unemployment for the 120 drivers/owners. A ban will also cause an economic downturn to the horse businesses in New York and the surrounding states for equipment, grooms and farriers. In addition, 120 equine related replacement jobs don’t exist in the City’s already bloated employment rolls. Any City proffered unrelated job would be an insult to a carriage horse professional. Importantly, will the City Council be using taxpayers’s money to remedy the carriage drivers/owners loss of millions of dollars due to the proposed ban? The ban is the idiosyncratic wish of the City Council, backed by real estate, who want the stables, and their minions, the animal lobbyists, as well as the Mayor. They can all be viewed as being unkind to the horses and drivers. Now the list –

1. Carriage rides are the safest form of transportation in the City. Even with Romanch Mahajan’s unfortunate fatal accident, which it turns out was the fault of ConEd and City Agencies, the accident rate is only .006 per year, or 1 accident in the Park in 167 years. By comparison to other transportation, statistics of excess deaths in accidents for e-bikes, pedicabs, cars, buses are well documented and far higher. There were 25 e-biker related deaths last year with an average of 20 per year previously. The pubic complains endlessly to 311 and 911 about accidents with motorized vehicles, not about the carriage horses. As to Romanch’s accident, the City will likely be utilizing taxpayers’ money in the Mahajan family’s court case to pay for the irresponsible City agencies’ that “failed to act on known safety hazards” i.e., stray voltage, at the scene of the accident, apart from ConEd’s own responsibility.

2. The City’s plan to license the e-bikes and motorized scooters won’t work because the present motorized licensed pedicabs and other drivers ignore local laws and remove or coverup licenses when they’re inconvenient. The NYPD may refuse to enforce the licensing scheme anyway. The police already refuse to arrest or even show up when the motorized pedicab drivers assault the carriage drivers, and the police generally refuse to arrest or charge e-bikers causing severe accidents.

3. Allegations of abuse against the carriage horse Lady and the court case concerning Ryder went nowhere, as both horses died natural deaths. It was just the animal lobbyists and politicians blurting out empty slogans. Even the WSJ agrees. Carriage horse Deniz was killed by the irresponsible behavior of the Central Park Conservancy to place unmarked poisonous yew plants in the Park, which he consumed. The charity still hasn’t removed the toxic yew plants.

4. Faulty data collection in the Central Park Conservancy’s recent poll created the false impression that the public supports the ban. Among the errors, the poll characterized frequent Central Park goers as using the Park three times per year. Other polls show the public supports the carriage horses. In the past few weeks, since the news of a pending ban, an equine veterinarian reported that drivers are saying that many tourists and Park goers are coming up to them and telling them they want the horses to remain in the Park.

5. The City Council has no jobs to offer suited to horsemen as a substitute despite the Council’s concern that their ban will destroy their industry. They’d just be putting the carriage drivers out of work and many would endure great financial loses. Some owner/drivers have their medallions plus up to one million dollars in equipment, plus their horses. Besides losing their horses, the owners/drivers would have an impossible-to-remedy loss over their 68 medallions. A driver/medallion owner explained, “The question is what is a carriage medallion that is supposed to last to infinity worth ? I would say that it’s in the millions especially if it’s been removed from service permanently.” Theoretically, each medallion removed should be reimbursed for millions. Will the City make good on that amount per medallion if a ban is enacted?

6. Horses are emotionally attached to their owners/drivers and would be saddened without them. Forcing a horse to an unfamiliar place away from its care giver/owner is cruel. Except for Council member James Gennaro, who is an equestrian, the other Council members aren’t knowledgeable about anything equine so they wouldn’t know about this bond of affection. Former NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn told me years ago, “I don’t know anything about horses. I get my talking points from the ASPCA and the Humane Society.” Current Speaker Julie Menin and the other Council members won’t admit that they too know nothing about horses and get their talking points from others who have a vested interest in ending the horse drawn carriages.

8. The City needs to rid the parks of all motorized vehicles or risk more serious e-biker, and motorized scooter and pedicab accidents. Those are the original parks regulations and should be brought back. Former Mayor Adams’ disastrous pilot program of allowing speeding motorized vehicles in the parks should be dropped. In the meantime, the Central Park Conservancy needs to reverse the recent ruling allowing the horses to share their exclusive lane with dangerous zooming motorized vehicles.

9. Instead of going ahead with its draconian ban, the City Council should instead pass Council member Gennaro’s proposed Intro 937. This bill focuses on improving carriage horse welfare and re-establishes hitching posts that the City gratuitously removed.

Should the City Council pass the horse drawn carriage ban, it will be proof that they have no respect for the blue collar drivers, many of whom are immigrants. It will also indicate that the Council has no respect for the public who do want the horses to remain in the Park. Passing the ban will indicate as well that the City Council is pandering to real estate, and their block of animal lobbyist voters. As to their lack of transparency, Speaker Julie Menin and the City Council refuse to answer any questions about their militant stance supporting the proposed ban, without any rational evidence for doing so.