Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Kotz / Legislature / The Economy What? You Want to Eat Black Beauty?
Posted by Pete Kotz on Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 5:21 AM
It seems a perfectly natural move. There's an excess of old and otherwise unwanted horses that can't find homes. So why not use them for something productive, like food? Horse meat is eaten elsewhere in the world, and it's also used as animal feed. And we'd just be paying homage to that backbone of the natural world, the food chain.
But the problem is one of sensitivity. While it's okay to eat pork and beef, for some reason Americans have a problem chowing horses. Chalk it up to The Cute Animal Theory: We just can't seem to eat animals that make for pretty and loving pets.
So Niceley has inserted a poison pill in the bill to stave off lawsuits from "some fringe radical animal rights group." We'll let Tom Humphrey of the Knoxville News Sentinel explain:
The measure also declares that anyone who files a lawsuit against establishing a horse processing plant in the state must post a bond with the court equal to 20 percent of the cost of building the plant. If the bond is not filed, the bill calls for automatic dismissal of the lawsuit.
Comments (15)
Showing 1-15 of 15
As a horse person, I can tell you that the people against this are not horse people. Since horse meat processeing was stopped three years ago and with the drought, we have seen an increase of starved, mistreated and sick horses. In some areas, horses are being left tied to telephone poles because the owner can no longer care for the animal. This is cruel and heartbreaking.
Meat processing helps provides an outlet to prevent cruelty. Horses are not like Fluffy the dog and are difficult and expensive to keep just as pets.
like
dislike
Exactly, Desdemona. There's a pony on Craigslist right now that someone abandoned to an open pasture. There was an abandoned horse hit by a car in Norene. People who understand the epidemic proportions of overbreeding poor quality horses, plus untrained, starved, neglected, or downright dangerous horses that no one wants - are for REGULATED slaughter in the US as a practical alternative.
And, sadly, let us not forget the nightmare that has become living animals shipped to other states for processing. Isn't it better to kill them here than torture them by neglect on their way to be killed elsewhere?
The whole situation is just so damn sad, but this is one of those times when I think it's better that we do it here where we can regulate it and keep an eye on it and make sure that horse-suffering is reduced as much as possible.
As a horseman, I know that almost all horse medications and supplements are not allowed in food animals ever. Bute, which is horse aspirin, is a carcinogen in humans.
Tennessee was shipping horses to other states when the plants were open in Illinois and Texas. Those plants were known for environmental violations and never paying fines or taxes.
Here's what Cavel looked like in Illinois:
Ooze at Cavel not a worry, says manager
http://www.daily-chronicle.com/articles/2007/02/19/news/news02.txt
After we shut them down they moved to Canada, until they were shut down for food safety violations earlier this year.
Transporting horses to slaughter is only part of the suffering horses go through before they die. The cruel box where the horses are hit on the body and head with a captive bolt mny times before it goes down and then they hit them while they are down is cruelty beyond any persons imagination.
There is not such thing as a humane slaughter of a horse. Even Temple Grandin, who developed a horse slaughter plant admits that 10% or more horses would still suffer painful deaths with her design compared to cattle where it is 1%.
Horses are fight/flight animals and seeing the footage on video and those that have gone to slaughter plants and seeing with their own eyes see the horror the horses go through.
As for due process this addition to the bill is against the very constitution that we all believe in and hold dearly.
Yes, but Leah, you don't acknowledge that horses are suffering now. Being tied to a pole and left to die? That's suffering. Being left to forage in a too-small field without any supplementary feed until you starve to death? That's suffering. Being taken out back and shot at by a person with little experience in killing an animal that big? Terrible suffering.
So... I mean, like I said, it sucks, but damn, what are we going to do while we wait around for human beings to get their acts together? Is suffering to death as a result of neglect better than suffering as a result of imperfect slaughter practices? I don't believe it is.
I hate to break this to people like "Desdemona" but I am a horse person who is against slaughtering horses. Here is a short list other horse people who are opposed to slaughtering horses:
Gary Biszantz, owner, Cobra Farm
Kerry Carlson, Exec. VP of Marketing, West Point Thoroughbreds
Sean Clancy, steeplechase champion, equestrian magazine publisher, author
John K. Griggs, DVM, equine vet and steeplechase owner, breeder and trainer
Arthur Hancock, owner, Stone Farm
John Hettinger, chairman of the executive committee, Fasig-Tipton
Jonathan Thorne, client and market development, Gainesway Farm, breeder
Kerry Zeigler, VMD, equine vet, breeder
Nick Zito, trainer and director of the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation
I'd say that these people who own, train and breed horses qualify as "horse people."
-------
Another point that is largely ignored in these articles is that slaughter has NOTHING to do with horse welfare, the current problems we are seeing are due to the bad economy (people losing their jobs). What horse slaughter is about is supplying a demand to the overseas market. For more info on that, read this article: http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/features/horseslaughter-139.shtml
-------
As to Mr. Kotz's "Cute Animal Theory", we also don't eat dogs here in America due to our cultural view in which we see dogs as sporting and companion animals. A large percentage of Americans also regard horses in that manner.
A good example that proves this point is the Caisson Platoon. This unit of the US Army is in charge of all state funerals, which all former presidents are entitled to.
In June of 2004 we saw a horse drawn caisson bearing the flag draped casket of former US President Ronald Reagan as it made its way along Constitution Avenue to the US Capitol. The caisson was followed by a riderless black horse tacked with an officer's English saddle with ammunition pouch, saber, bridle and riding boots facing backwards in the stirrups. These backwards-facing riding boots are meant to symbolize a fallen leader who will never again lead his troops into battle.
To those who state that they don't see the difference between a horse and a cow, I offer up this question: Do you think Mr. Reagan's funeral procession would have had the same kind of dignity if the caisson had been drawn by cows and followed by a riderless pig? I do not think so myself, and I think the most of America would agree with me.
To answer the point on overbreeding made by "HorsePersonForSlaughter". Most of the overbreeding that is occuring right now is being cause by Quarter Horse breeders, and their behavior is being encouraged by the American Quarter Horse Assn (AQHA). The AQHA is opposed to ending slaughter since it gives them an easy way to dispose of their crop outs (foals that don't meet conformation standards). To me, it's rather hypocritical of the AQHA to say slaughter is needed to prevent "unwanted horses" when their breeders are the biggest contributors to the problem.
Read these articles for all the sordid details on the AQHA:
http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/features/horseslaughter-149.shtml
http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/features/horseslaughter-165.shtml
Duane B above lists a lot of high-powered horse industry people who are against horse slaughter. But are those same people also against any legislation that would require breeders such as themselves to post breeding taxes that would support their unwanted output after their racing careers are over? Probably not.
Whether the huge and growing population of unwanted horses is due to the economy, to overbreeding, to urbanization (where it is too expensive to keep an unwanted horse) or to bad owners is beside the point. The point is that they exist.
Humane slaughter is possible, and it should be required of any slaughter houses opening in TN, BUT it is misguided to say that slaughter should be banned ... it does condemn horses to a worse existence and more suffering.
By the way, most of the horsemeat that is or would be created here would go to Europe and Japan. We don't have demand for it here.
Actually a lot of the people I list are known in Thoroughbred Racing circles spend a lot of their own money supporting sanctuaries to retire their horses; Nick Zito is a renowned Thoroughbred trainer (look for him at the Kentucky Derby) who is also the director of the Thoroughbred Retirement Fund. These people are selfless in that manner in that they are willing to spend their money on these horses. A basic Google search on Thoroughbred Retirement will pull up a wealth of info.
The Quarter Horse groups have nothing to equal that at all. All that these groups do is repeat the mantra that "slaughter is needed" while not lifting a finger AND contributing to the problem by churning out more horses.
------
Now onto the horse welfare point. As I mentioned, slaughter has nothing to do with horse welfare. Here are a few facts which prove that statement:
- USDA statistics there was a sharp decline in the number of US horses slaughtered during the 1990s. According to these records there were 345,700 horses slaughtered for export in 1990; 10 years later in 2000 that number was 50,400. During this timeframe the number of horses slaughtered per year dropped by as many as 79,000 and there was no rash of "unwanted horses".
- An article that appeared in The Guardian (UK publication) in June of 2007 shows how demand for horsemeat in France was being stepped up through creative marketing campaigns (Link to Guardian article - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/15/france.lifeandhealth)
- Due to that increased demand, more horses had to be slaughtered. According to USDA stats, horses were regularly imported from Canada into the US for slaughter to fill that demand. Take a look at these statistics:
2005 - 7,865 horses imported for slaughter in the US
2006 - 4,022 horses imported for slaughter in the US
2007 - 2,488 horses imported for slaughter in the US
Guess what we still had horses being neglected and abused during that timeframe as well, the AQHA was also making their statements about unwanted horses as well. How could there be an "unwanted horse problem" if the slaughterhouses had to import horses??
-------
Finally, the "Humane Slaughter" aspect is rather ironic when you consider how brutally horses were treated while being transported to slaughter. USDA records and photos which were acquired via the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) show horses with broken legs, eyes gouged out and other atrocities. Check out this press release (warning, the images are graphic and you'll need Adobe Acrobat to view it) - http://www.kaufmanzoning.net/nov24/pressrelease.pdf
Well Aunt B. why are horses being tied to poles to starve to death when horse slaughter is an option at this time? Does that make sense to you?
It has been proven and in my state of California that when horse slaughter was banned abandonment dropped to an all time low and has been low since that time.
There seems to be a common line with horse slaughter and abandonment and no horse slaughter and low abandonment. I think it has to do with the value we place for the horse as a living creature deserving of our best care from birth to death.
Horse slaughter is not best care, but cruel and inhumane treatment of a horse by people who have no respect for living things.
The AVMA has now classified horses as PETS, not LIVESTOCK. In the US, we do not slaughter PETS.
What continues to be absent in this dialogue is the pain and suffering evident in the process of horse slaughter, nor the extreme abuse involved in transporting horses to slaughter.
Those who are using isolated cases, of animal abuse, will not be eradicated by the inception of slaughterhouses. This abuse occurred when all three of our foreign-owned slaughterhouses were operating at full capacity.
Legalized horse slaughter abets horse theft, stolen horses and over-breeding.... all which use horses as a means of profit, NOT humane euthanasia.
Horses have a longtime history of being man's ally in wartime, racing, companionship, and the rehabilitation for human disorders.... then we should send them to their premature death to get the last penny, for their death, in return for their loyalty.
The pro-slaughter faction sees horses as objects, not sentient beings.
I didn't realize that there were so many people in the horse industry that are potential criminals. It is a crime to abandon/abuse/neglect your horse. People who commit these crimes are criminals! We need to inform are reps. that we are on the verge of an epidemic of criminals. After all there are enough studies that show if a person will abuse/neglect an animal they will do that to a person. Keep your kids away from the horse industry.
