U.S. ban on horse slaughter lifted

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: Market Watch

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) -- A ban on killing horses for meat has been lifted by members of Congress who dropped a provision in a spending bill that barred funding for the inspection of slaughtering facilities, the Oklahoman reports. The legislators pointed to a report from the General Accounting Office that the ban, put in place in 2006, had led to unintended consequences, including an increase in horse abandonments, price decreases and a jump in horse exports for overseas slaughter, the newspaper noted. "Horse welfare in the United States has generally declined since 2007, as evidenced by a reported increase in horse abandonments and an increase in investigations for horse abuse and neglect,'' the GAO report said. "The extent of the decline is unknown due to a lack of comprehensive, national data, but state officials attributed the decline in horse welfare to many factors, but primarily to the cessation of domestic slaughter and the U.S. economic downturn."

Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-ban-on-horse-slaughter-lifted-2011-11-28?reflink=MW_news_stmp

[msongs]

1. the cow lobby wins big lol. nt

[Iggo]

29. eat mor horsz. (n/t)

[lonestarnot]

45. cows with guns!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQMbXvn2RNI

[Ian David]

2. Hooray for creating jobs in the horse meat industry! n/t

[MADem]

3. The Europeans will be thrilled. nt

[dipsydoodle]

41. Can't speak for Europe in general

but in the UK whilst legal for horse meat to be sold as food none is in fact sold. That's because we love horses.

Its illegal for horses to exported from here to be killed for food.

[MADem]

43. I'm afraid I can. I lived right down the road from the horsemeat butcher,

who did a brisk business. The happy horse on his sign was always a bit off-putting to me.

[Vincardog]

4. IT comes down to "Would you rather see a horse slaughtered or starve to death?" nt

[Scout]

6. well, for people with limited thinking (i.e. greedy and/or stupid) that is what it

comes down to.

killing isn't the only option. and torturing them before they are killed is CERTAINLY not an option.

[Vincardog]

8. How does realizing that horses suffer in economic times like these "limited thinking" Please

enlighten me. What are people who can't feed themselves supposed to do with their horses?

[defendandprotect]

12. And when they can't afford to heat their homes, they can begin to burn down all the trees?

That's in line with "We had to burn the village to save it!" thinking !!

Rather, let's keep asking why the richest nation in the world can only afford

war and to feed elites/corporates?

[Scout]

21. stop overbreeding

those who can afford horses form hay/grain collectives to help those who need it during rough times.

make the transport and slaughter process actually HUMANE ...

make slaughter a not-for-profit so that the greedy will find it more difficult to profit from slaughter.

i can't believe that the "horse community" can't come up with anything except slaughter. i guess it's just too, too profitable for some people.

if you can't afford to feed yourself, you should have done something about your horse a lot sooner.

limited thinking applies to the "only" solution, slaughter. if that's the only solution you can come up with, then yes, you suffer from limited thinking ... or possibly greed.

[Vincardog]

24. I have never abandoned nor have I slaughtered any horse. I have do not breed either. My answer to

fact that they had re-legalized horse slaughter in the face of horse abandonment and starvation was "Wold you rather have slaughter or starvation?".
As to the question of "Should I keep a horse"?
I decided I should, I got a rescue from the Humane society and have been feeding her for 20 years.
Would you please get off your high horse now?

[Kali]

32. sounds like the assholes who tell poor people they shouldn't have children

like "shit" never happens to anybody

slaughter is not the only choice. YOU are free to start a fund for humane disposal and/or rescue

or any of the other possibilities you want to help fund

humane slaughter of LIVESTOCK is a legitimate way to dispose of excess LIVESTOCK

if your horse is a pet, by all means treat it as such, I know I do - but not all horses are pets and in fact many "pet" horses are nothing but neglected livestock that aren't good for anything but meat.

[Scout]

48. unless you have a sudden, all-encompassing tragedy of some sort

if you get to the point where you really can't feed yourself, and you still have your horse you have made some pretty piss poor decisions.

and get off your fucking high horse, i already work with horse rescues.

[Kali]

50. still being judgemental there

the issue is "still have your horse" and how to not "still have your horse" due to circumstances often beyond the control of the person such as an illness or job loss. NOT how they got into that situation. Even if that person exercises your version of good judgement (speaking of being on a high horse) and attempts to divest themselves of their horse(s) the option of slaughter sales is important.

Since you claim to be involved in rescue I am sure you are aware of the numbers. It is a crisis.

[bread_and_roses]

9. Wrong question - especially given inhumane history of horse slaughter in US

Slaughter was banned in US for a reason - it was (and I'm sure will be again) inhumane. Yes, here. Re-instating slaughter is not the answer to unwanted horses and irresponsible owners, anymore than 6 million or so abandoned dogs/cats killed in US is an answer to feral dogs and animal abuse and overpopulation. There are real answers to unwanted animals but they are expensive, and owner/breeder associations would fight them tooth and nail - just as dog breeders in CA (I think it was) fought and defeated a law that would have actually put a dent in irresponsible breeding and the consequent # of unwanted dogs.

[Vincardog]

10. Your answer is?

[LanternWaste]

20. I've often found that when presented with only two options

It's often found that when presented with only two options, it's our own lack of wisdom denying us the additional choices.

That one may not know the precise and relevant formula to prevent starvation and slaughter, wisdom with depth allows us the knowledge that other answers are available-- but I imagine it's up to us to look for them.

On the other hand, wisdom without depth (cleverness) allows us only option a or option b-- that the lack of perceiving options c+ is more indicative of our own laziness of critical thought processes (dogma) and much less indicative of the problem itself. (Paraphrase from 'Twilight of the Idols' by Nietzsche )

"It's no great sin to live in ignorance... the sin lies in accepting it"

[Vincardog]

22. What a clever response. Given the following facts. 1) Horses are being abandoned to starve.

2) they just passed a law to allow horses to be slaughtered.
3) My comment was the choice seems to be Slaughter them or let them starve.
4) No one has offered any comment about doing Humane harvesting of horses or any alternative to letting them starve
I fail to see how your "wisdom" offers anything of relevance to to conversation.
If you look for and see other answers to be available please inform me.

[LanternWaste]

26. That I know merely three places of Pi is not indicative that there are only three places.

"I fail to see how your "wisdom" offers anything of relevance to to conversation..."
That I know merely three places of Pi is not indicative that there are only three places of Pi. Does that statement also have no place in a discussion of Pi? Is one's dogma constrained that severely?


Not my wisdom at all... attributed and cited to others. :shrug:

[Vincardog]

27. Do you have a point?

[bread_and_roses]

42. The answer begins with the breeding - as it does with cats and dogs

If we were serious about animal welfare, and not just making ourselves feel better with a donation to the humane society, for instance, then there would be strict control on breeding, and it would be very expensive to breed. This would actually be easier with horses, who rarely breed "accidentally." Fees would be applied at every stage of transaction on pet/companion/entertainment (ie, "working" as racehorses and Eventers etc. for horses - a % of the "take" and/or prize $$ designated for retirement/humane death) animals. Require humane euthanasia and make that cheap - use part of the fees collected to subsidize. Use fees to subsidize sufficient "animal cops" to monitor. Put real teeth in animal abuse laws - violators should go to prison and bear steep fines.

Although the horse problem is dwarfed by the - I think last I read 4-6 million dogs/cats destroyed in the US every year - the roots are the same. All the pleas in the world that people "be responsible," all the donations rationally possible to the ASPCA, the Humane Society, whatever, would not solve that problem - anymore than donating to retirement facilities solves the unwanted TB racehorse problem, however well-intentioned those working in that arena. It has to be solved at the source.

Just as in - CA I think it was - breeders would scream like banshees and campaign ferociously against such laws. They defeated a law there that would have put a serious dent in the population of unwanted dogs. Some love, from those who proclaim themselves as loving and responsible. Just don't touch their wallets.

All of those measures would have to be fleshed out, of course. Or smarter people than I can come up with better ones. But I think you can at least see what I mean when I write "wrong question." I think the right question is how do we prevent the situation.

And for those championing the return of horse slaughter in the US, I suggest you take a look at the research that caused people to champion its banning so vigorously - and no, most of us were not naive about the possible outcomes. Interesting to me that all the abuses that are being used to justify a return to slaughter were happening while we had slaughter as well. But somehow that little fact doesn't seem to matter in the minds of those so happy to see the return.

edit for grammar

[Vincardog]

51. I do not believe that stating that it seems to be a choice between Slaughter and starvation is the

same as "championing the return of horse slaughter in the US"
Any more than being for a woman's right to choose is championing abortion.
Some things should be a sad last choice and minimized as much as possible.

[Kali]

33. it was banned becasue do-gooders didn't think about the unintended consequences

of conning the general public into thinking they were saving horsies from being killed.

[leftyohiolib]

15. i think i can speak for the horse when i say let them take a chance on starving

rather than be slaughtered

[beardown]

16. So Mr Ed is a friend of yours?

There have been a number of large scale rescues in my area and I can assure you that the horses there would NOT vote for a slow starvation over a quick death.

There is a growing problem with placing these horses as horse rescue groups are becoming filled to capacity.

If you'd like to help out, send me your email name and I can put a couple more rescue horses on my place, but I'll need several hundred startup dollars from you to get them checked and stabilized as often times these horses have horrific hoof conditions and open wounds and need special vet care and supplies to make it and then 100 to 200 a month for feed and vet bills.

Compassion for horses is great, but this disaster was predicted by many horse owners when it was enacted. Compassion for horses, but then not stepping up with the stalls, pastures, and special care than many need is not only counter productive as it helps ignore the fatal flaw in the recent law.

Many horses are being left along rural highways now and cars hitting horses on highways is a major lose-lose situation that is a direct outcome of the earlier ban.

I've been fortunate enough to still have enough financial resources to have willed my Appaloosa to my daughter and provided her with care money and facilities if I die before him. However, even before these hard economic times, it is a huge luxury to be able to afford to do this.

Once you get the slaugher houses back, you get the regulations back into US hands, shorter and more humane hauls for the horses, and an easier situation for local people to monitor the slaugher houses.

[KathieG]

53. Problem is, the availability of horse slaughter doesn't stop people from starving horses...

We are shipping more horses to slaughter now than when the US plants were booming. Low-dollar horses often end up with kill-buyers that ship to either Mexico or Canada. There is a big "kill sale" in New Holland PA, and there is another in NJ held weekly, pictured here are the horses, ponies and donkeys saved from the kill pen last week http://www.nj-feedlot-horse-rescue.com/availablecamelot.html a horse rescue takes pictures of all the horses sold to #10 (the kill buyer) and they offer them for sale for just over the meat price (unless the KB decides he has a "good one" then he will jack up the price if he thinks he can get it), they post the new horses every Wednesday night and the horses are usually available until Sat. morning, if not sold...they usually ship. This is a special agreement they have going with this particular kill buyer because he prefers to sell them out of the pen rather than pay for fuel and the hassle of shipping them north to the plant.

There are many with financial interests in opening US plants again, it's not that it's "needed". As far as an owner being able to "dispose" of a horse via the slaughter pipeline...it still happens every day in this country. There were just as many people starving their herds when slaughter was booming in this country as there are now that the plants are closed. For a horse to ship to a sale or plant, they have to have a negative coggins test for Equine Infectious Anemia, it costs about $35 a head plus a farm call charge from the veterinarian. People that won't or can't shell out money for feed are not going to pay for blood tests and veterinary charges whether slaughter is readily available or not. If a horse owner falls on hard times they aren't able to sell or place the horse with a rescue, they can still find the horse a place to go via the classifieds. Put a free horse on Craigslist and see how fast they go. Dealers pick these horses up all the time, sadly many end up going through the local sales and then on to slaughter like the horses at the link above, but there is certainly no excuse to let a horse starve.

[jberryhill]

5. It's not just for breakfast anymore

[bowens43]

7. If we are going to eat animals

then we should be able to eat any and all non-endangered animals. Killing a horse for meat is no more vile then killing a cow, a pig, a chicken or a kitten for meat.

[bread_and_roses]

11. it is when performed in inhumane fashon - as was case in US

- which was why people fought for the ban in the first place.

[Tumbulu]

13. yes, but shipping them to Mexico to be slaughtered

inhumanely is not a good option either.

I think that if the slaughter is humane and the parts of the animal are used, then it is better than letting these poor horses starve to death.

My mind was changed about this after reading Temple Grandin who advocated for humane slaughter of horses to be allowed in the US. The description of the way the Amish treated their old horses changed my mind.

No one breeds horses for the production of meat. But by having a humane way to put them down and make use of what can be made use of is not a bad thing.

[mimitabby]

17. I agree

making it illegal to slaughter horses in the USA did nothing to improve the lot of unwanted horses here. I've seen far too many stories in the papers the last few years about skeletal or dead horses being found in people's yards. And the sad part is, usually the owners love their horses. but if they can't pay their bills they can't afford horse feed either.

[KathieG]

56. As a member of the horse community I can tell you...

Slaughter is alive and well...just a little farther away. "Kill-buyers" are still collecting free and cheap horses at local sales and shipping them for slaughter in Mexico and Canada. We are shipping more horses to slaughter now than when the US plants were open, so there is absolutely no correlation between the US plant closings and an apparent increase in horse starvation cases. I think a lot of it is that the people who can't or won't spend the money on horse feed certainly can't or won't spend it on the required coggins test for Equine Infectious Anemia and veterinary farm call charge they have to have in order to ship their horse. So the horse starves.

There is no reason to allow a horse or any animal for that matter to starve to death. If you run out of horse feed today, you can post a free classified ad tomorrow and place the horse with someone who will cover the coggins fee, take the horse and feed it. It may end up being a "dealer", but he will feed the horse until he sells it. Local horse rescues can help locate places for hard to sell or hard to place horses or you can get help with euthanasia expenses for horses that are not able to be placed from organizations like this... http://www.dalahorsefoundation.org/

[neoconn]

18. Ding Ding

Best answer...

[beardown]

37. Agreed

As I noted above "Once you get the slaugher houses back, you get the regulations back into US hands, shorter and more humane hauls for the horses, and an easier situation for local people to monitor the slaugher houses."

I've got a lot better chance to be able to reach and monitor a slaughter facility in the USA than Mexico or even Canada.

[KathieG]

55. The plants currently operating in Mexico are owned by the same...

companies that owned the US plants and operate in the same manner. http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/mar09/090301h.asp . There were all kinds of scary "Mexican slaughter videos" being posted after the US plants closed by the pro-slaughter folks to get people to want US plants again, but those are not the norm. The Mexican plants are just the same run of the mill horse slaughter plants that pro-slaughter people called "humane" when they were located here.

http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/white_paper.php

"1. Horse Slaughter is not humane euthanasia

It is the united opinion of VEW that horse slaughter is inhumane, and that it is an unacceptable way to end a horse's life under any circumstance. One need only observe horse slaughter to see that it is a far cry from genuine humane euthanasia. From the transport of horses on inappropriate conveyances for long periods of time without food, water or rest to the very ugly slaughter process in which horses react with pain and fear, no evidence exists to support the claim that horse slaughter is a form of humane euthanasia. Rather, it is a brutal process that results in very tangible and easily observable equine suffering.

It is worth noting that the suffering of horses in slaughter is accentuated by the very fact that they are not raised for slaughter. Horses going to slaughter have largely been accustomed to close human contact whether through racing, ranch work, pleasure riding, rodeo or any of the other ways in which horses are used in this country. While some are purposely sold into slaughter by their owners most end up at the abattoir through pure bad luck: they were sold at auction and the winning bidder was a “killer-buyer” working for one of the slaughter plants. To suddenly be treated as pure livestock must be disorienting and frightful, and can only compound their suffering as they proceed to slaughter.

We believe that it is an unethical and dangerous practice for the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) to attempt to equate horse slaughter with humane euthanasia."

[quakerboy]

14. More inhumane

than what they do to cows and chickens today? Honest question, this is an area I know relatively little about.

[Tumbulu]

19. humane animal slaughter is something that I care deeply about

and for many of us in agriculture it dictates a lot.

With cattle Temple Grandin's handling equipment and her lifelong work have really changed things radically for the better. If you can try to watch the HBO special about her life and work. One person can make a difference. If they stick with it and are brilliant, as she is.

My neighbor raises organic pasture hogs and drives them to a humane facility where the pigs all walk into a room, CO2 is pumped in, they all go to sleep and then after that they are killed.

Sheep in the facility near me follow a lead trained sheep with a bell down an alleyway, where they are picked up on slings - which causes them to relax completely and in this state- six at a time so they are not alone and prone to panic they are stunned and then killed. The USDA inspector is there at all times. No shouting, so prodding, every person bringing animals has to sign an document attesting that they have not traveled more than 2 hours without a rest outside of the tailer with food and water. No one is allowed to speak over a whisper to keep the sheep calm. And they are quite serious about this.

Chickens remain the nightmare it seems, but Temple Grandin has been working with this industry to improve things. IMO they have a very long way to go. There are humane chicken slaughter facilities, but one has to look long and hard for this.

There are nightmare facilities still for cattle and hogs and sheep, but we have to keep working at eliminating them. The slaughter has been getting better, but the way they are raised must really be addressed. No one should allow the terribly tiny cages for hogs and chickens. Feed lot agriculture has to be stopped. There is no justification for it other than greed.

[LanternWaste]

23. Social mores are contrary to your position...

Social mores are contrary to your position, regardless of whether you yourself disagree with them or not.

The collective folkways and benign customs of a people are not often changed. One might argue (some actually have) that if eating meat, in and of itself has no context (allowing for the ingestion of any type of animal), then sex, in and of itself has no context, thus allowing for incest-- yet as that is contra-indicative of our social mores, we find ways to both justify and rationalize its disuse (see William Graham Sumner, the renowned sociologist of the early 20th century for a full treatise on the comparison).

[Xithras]

25. I've mentioned it before, but when I had to get rid of my horses...

...I had them listed on Craigslist for MONTHS, for FREE, before I finally found them a new owner. Even then, the new owner was a couple hours away, and would only take them if I delivered them. They literally weren't worth the $150 in gas it would have cost to pick them up.

Most people don't understand that older horses have no cash value, and that it's incredibly hard to GIVE them away. When you lose your job, are losing your house, and have to get rid of your horses quick, there are simply no options anymore. If someone has a better, practical, financial sustainable option to replace slaughter, I'd love to hear it.

I was lucky, and managed to find my horses a decent home before I had to resort to more drastic measures. Many people aren't as lucky, and simply end up abandoning them, shooting them, or letting them starve at pasture.

[lonestarnot]

46. Starve at pasture! What a fucking idea. So god damned disgusting. There is always another option!

[C. lupus familiaris]

28. so sad...

There are always free horses here.

http://www.thehorse.com/Horses/Available.aspx

I've also seen a few on Craig's List.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

30. "Horse Slaughter."

I can smell the desperation.

[malthaussen]

31. Horses, good.

Now go after those dogs and cats. Lots of protein there.

-- Mal

[Vincardog]

34. MILLIONS of dogs and cats are "destroyed" each year. Your point is?

[Kali]

35. this is an option like terminating a pregnancy that needs to be available

it is not the first choice for most people, as abortion is not. But sometimes the alternatives are much worse, so this needs to be available. Horses are large animals, they are livestock.

[Scout]

47. "horses are livestock"

yes, we saddle up and have cow races; and we ride pigs when we round up the cows; we use sheep for hunting/jumping. many police departments use bulls for their mounted patrols.

:rofl:

[Kali]

52. ?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/livestock

livestock <ˈlaɪvˌstɒk>
n
(Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Agriculture) (functioning as singular or plural) cattle, horses, poultry, and similar animals kept for domestic use but not as pets, esp on a farm or ranch


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/livestock

live·stock
noun \ˈlīv-ˌstäk\
Definition of LIVESTOCK
: animals kept or raised for use or pleasure; especially : farm animals kept for use and profit


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/livestock

live·stock
    Show IPA
noun ( used with a singular or plural verb )
the horses, cattle, sheep, and other useful animals kept or raised on a farm or ranch.



:shrug:

[Brickbat]

36. Getting rid of slaughter was a mistake, and I hope this is a step in the right direction.

[Rincewind]

38. If they're made of meat,

they're good to eat.

[HereSince1628]

39. The thing that concerns me is the presence of toxic pharmaceuticals...

I realize that most horses shipped to slaughter haven't been treated well and that this may be my own queeziness, but, there it is.

I really don't know what the hell is in horse wormers, bot-fly swipe, and a bunch of other things to which a very well intentioned people expose their saddle ponies to keep them well...not really expecting that their hooved family members will ultimately be eaten.

I really don't know that anyone bothers to check for those things before the flesh is sold as people food.

[riderinthestorm]

40. Theoretically, any horse sold at auction or to a slaughterhouse must be verified drug free

The owner of the horse going to slaughter must sign forms that indicate that it hasn't been given any drugs at all in the past 6 months (I just read that fun fact on google!)

Your point however is valid. Most horse meat in the US isn't tested for drugs in their system, the slaughterhouse just goes by that written paper. That's not good enough in my opinion.

Right now, as it is, I'd bet that the horses going to slaughter in Canada or Mexico probably have enough time for any drugs to pass through their systems before they are killed - ship to auction, auction, transport, wait at slaughterhouse... all of that takes time.

But if we have (HUMANE! PLEASE!) slaughterhouses here in the US, they will be much closer and owners will most likely be driving their animals themselves. There will be more than a bit of lying going on I'm sure. If/when someone builds a slaughterhouse in the US, there must be some way built into the system that the horse is tested for harmful drugs.

[harvey007]

44. And Obama signed the bill into law

Obama Legalizes Horse Slaughter for Human Consumption

http://technorati.com/lifestyle/article/obama-legalizes-horse-slaughter-for-human/

[Little Tich]

49. Horse meat is good and very lean. Have to watch out for toxoplasmosis, though.

[KathieG]

54. Toxoplasmosis is the least of your worries when eating horse meat...

http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/medications.php

It's the drugs that will get you. Europeans are finally finding out that the horse meat they have been eating isn't "wild mustang" like the package says.