If you think horse slaughter is humane then you need to see this... [Archive]

Dragoon

Feb. 7, 2004, 02:17 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:
Graphic yes - but the world is not a pretty place - we need such things to remind us. Yes, we could talk about the pros & cons of slaughter but my sig. below says my thoughts.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would toast you, but alas I have no wine. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Horse slaughter is never pleasant, but until people are willing to educate others and be educated, there are few reasonable options. I hear "rescue, rescue, rescue" up and down the wazoo, but no one is doing anything.

And I'm willing to bet good money that webpage you posted is happily funded by animal rights groups...which, in my opinion, can go jump of a cliff without parachutes. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

"I like colds because when I have a cold, I get to use my favorite drug - NYQUIL. It's the moonshine of medicine. Because when I have a cold, I want something that's really going to **** me up...Nyquil comes in two colors: red and green. And red and green are what? Christmas colors! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif That's right, Nyquil makes a dandy eggnog..." http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
- Lewis Black comedy

cgn38

Feb. 7, 2004, 02:21 PM

I totally agree with you, equinelaundry. My wish is that good people start treating their horses like they treat their dogs - companions for life.

equinelaundry

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:07 PM

Aawwww, you guys!!! And I was putting on my coat of armor to keep away from the flames. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Let's all toast to education this year and restraint when wanting to bring a new life into the world. Let's celebrate the ones we have!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sadsmile.gif

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

Snowbird

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:17 PM

You will not find anyone here that thinks horse slaughter or human consumption is a wonderful idea. However, it will be worse if the horses that no longer have anyone to love them have to be shipped up to Canada to be killed or if the rendering plants no longer accept horses.

It is a fact of life that some people will not spend the money to have a horse euthanized when instead of spending $350 they can get paid $350.
This whole campaign against slaughter will cost us dearly, if as I've been told the plants that render them will no longer accept them. Who will remove those that have been euthanized? In our town it is illegal to bury them on the farm because of endangering the water table.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Daydream Believer

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:19 PM

I don't have any idea who's website that is and don't care. The videos of horses being stunned 3 to 4 times as well as in the shoulder speak for themselves. I found this website posted on another horse board and remember many discussions here on COTH where folks have argued that slaughter is humane. I saw very little in those videos that you could consider untraumatic to the horses. They are clearly very stressed and frightened, get a full view of horses being butchered and several have to be repeatedly stunned to knock them senseless enough to be bled out. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I think it's horrible.

BTW, I have two rescue horses in my barn. One of the two was 3 days away from a Canadian slaughter house when I found him.

While I find the idea of eating horses to be repulsive, I do not necessarily object to killing horses for food. I do object to treating them like these horses are being treated. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif Perhaps nicer environments inside the slaughterhouses to keep the stress level down, quieter, no views of dead horses, and a more accurate, humane way of destroying them.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

BasqueMom

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:30 PM

There is another website called www.equineadvocate.com (http://www.equineadvocate.com). Took a look at the pics of the slaughter process--took a while to get over it. There has to be a better way!

But then they all can't find homes. Have a friend who keeps breeding bad-tempered mares and wonders why there isn't much of a market for the foals. She'll buy about anything someone waves in front of her and breed it as soon as possible. Sad!!!!! Keeps telling me you can't make any money with geldings--I have three and making money is not the purpose in owning them. She has thrown several hundred thousand dollars away over the last four or five years and added to the number of unwanted horses. Sigh!

Julie
www.centaurfencing.com (http://www.centaurfencing.com)
"The Horse-Friendly Fence"

equinelaundry

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:40 PM

Snowbird, just my humble opinion that this would be less of a problem if people would take responsibility for the lives they bring into the world (human & critter but that's a whole 'nother topic!).

Rather than have to send healthy horses to slaughter houses why not educate people to stop breeding? The people who can really make an impact here is breeders. I realize this is a business for some people but again, not many people take responsibility for their breedings from birth to death. If they did this slaughter issue would not be an issue period.

I remember the quote of some ranch breeder out West last year and he says "What are we too do with all the colts?" Uhhh, how 'bout stop breeding. What an idiot. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

Then you have the topics of saving horses from rescues only to be bred again and again to earn their keep. Argument there is that they heroically saved a life at that time but......what about the lives that the mare will produce to "earn her keep"?

Reality check. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif This post is not for all and I don't want a debate on slaughter AGAIN. Just want to plant the seed to control the breeding folks.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

[This message was edited by equinelaundry on Feb. 07, 2004 at 07:03 PM.]

[This message was edited by equinelaundry on Feb. 07, 2004 at 07:06 PM.]

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:52 PM

1) Whether or not you think slaughter is a necessity is not the point here. The original poster, and the videos, show without a doubt that the methods used in the process are NOT humane and that horses do not react like cattle.

2) Please understand, there is a HUGE difference between rendering and slaughter. Slaughter is not rendering.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

Ghazzu

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by cgn38:
I totally agree with you, equinelaundry. My wish is that good people start treating their horses like they treat their dogs - companions for life.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Put in a few weeks working at a shelter, and you'll find that that's not always the case...

Unashamed member of the Arab clique...just settin' on the Group W bench.

silver

Feb. 7, 2004, 03:57 PM

I would like more information on when and where those pictures were taken. I've been in slaughter houses (not horse ones) and that type of thing is not the norm, but multiple stuns etc. do happen occasionally.

I'm definetely not anti-slaughter but it should be possible to do so skillfully and humanely. I support that but I certainly will not donate money to any extremist animal rights type group for any reason. I believe that closing slaughter houses just condemns horses to a long and horrible trailer trip. Thats what happened in CA.

Also when meatpacking went from a well paid union job to low paid scut work it led to all kinds of problems.

SweatySaddlepad

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
You will not find anyone here that thinks horse slaughter or human consumption is a wonderful idea. However, it will be worse if the horses that no longer have anyone to love them have to be shipped up to Canada to be killed or if the rendering plants no longer accept horses.

It is a fact of life that some people will not spend the money to have a horse euthanized when instead of spending $350 they can get paid $350.
This whole campaign against slaughter will cost us dearly, if as I've been told the plants that render them will no longer accept them. Who will remove those that have been euthanized? In our town it is illegal to bury them on the farm because of endangering the water table.

_Battle Scarred Veteran_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is a difference between rendering and slaughter. Slaughter is for Human consumption, rendering is for bi-products, after the animal has been euthanized. Often the rendering plants pick up animals that could not be buried because of laws regarding this. Be very happy if you are one of the people that can bury, alot can't http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif it's illegal.

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by silver:
I would like more information on when and where those pictures were taken. I've been in slaughter houses (not horse ones) and that type of thing is not the norm, but multiple stuns etc. do happen occasionally.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The reason that you see a difference in the slaughter videos of the horses is for 2 reasons - horses react differently to the procedure than cows and the fact that the AMVA guidelines state the for captive bolt death to be considered humane, that the head of the horse must be properly restrained. They don't restrain the heads in the horse slaughter plants.Watch the videos. Does anyone who is a horseman of any type really expect the horse to just stand there and take it under those circumstances?

And equinelaundry, you are correct that it will be graphic whether humane or not. But did you watch the videos? That's not just graphic. It's just plain sick how the horses are treated.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

equinelaundry

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:05 PM

I'm sorry. I edited above post.
I was thinking slaugher & consumtion at the same time. Kristie (who will stick to one thought at a time http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

silver

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:10 PM

Two Toofs, I'm not saying that those videos are OK, I clearly stated that I believe a humane method SHOULD exist, not that it does.

BUT I have had experience with animal rights groups and I would like to know when and where those videos were filmed. Was it even in the US? Have changes already been instituted in the plants? If information like that comes out later it makes everyone look bad and is ultimately detrimental to the real goal.

I would like to improve the laws relating to horse slaughter as much as anyone.

Daydream Believer

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:13 PM

I'll tell you what really pissed me off was the first horse...that little buckskin. That was not a "misaimed" stun IMO. It sure looked like he deliberately hit that horse in the shoulder with the captive bolt because it had it's head down. The other one that was down, scrambling and couldn't get up was horrible too. No animal should have to walk into that chute and be able to see the carcasses of other animals like that either. No wonder the poor things were so frightened. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

jvanrens

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:16 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BasqueMom:
But then they all can't find homes. Have a friend who keeps breeding bad-tempered mares and wonders why there isn't much of a market for the foals. She'll buy about anything someone waves in front of her and breed it as soon as possible. Sad!!!!! Keeps telling me you can't make any money with geldings--I have three and making money is not the purpose in owning them. She has thrown several hundred thousand dollars away over the last four or five years and added to the number of unwanted horses. Sigh!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I were you Julie, I wouldn't be refering to this woman as a "friend". http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

~~Some days are a total waste of makeup.~~

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by silver:

BUT I have had experience with animal rights groups and I would like to know when and where those videos were filmed. Was it even in the US? Have changes already been instituted in the plants? If information like that comes out later it makes everyone look bad and is ultimately detrimental to the real goal.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why don't you email them and ask where the videos were shot? What you see in that video is perfectly legal in the US.

I've seen footage from within one of the TX plants, shot within the past year that looked very similiar, only you could hear the horse scream in a sound I've never heard a horse make in my life as it was on the 3rd or 4th stun.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

equinelaundry

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:
And equinelaundry, you are correct that it will be graphic whether humane or not. But did you watch the videos? That's not just graphic. It's just plain sick how the horses are treated.
Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course! I am just getting numb. Not numb enough to not care, just numb enough so I don't come across as a crazy woman on a public forum http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif. I don't post on these subjects very often because they always get people fired up in a non-constructive way - just full blown emotions.

My thoughts this is sick, this is cruel, it is inhumane and (flame suit on) those that try to talk themselves into something else have something on their mind. Most of us have sold an animal out. Ummm no, I'm not a mind reader http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

It is my opinion that a breeder of any animal should spay, neuter, geld or NOT give papers on mares that are not suitable to pass on the traits demanded on for that breed, to prevent overpopulation. But, that would cut down on profit wouldn't it - horse has to "earn its keep".

I think that we can see from all the CANTER horses and other rescues that when a horse is born saddled with the responsibility of earning its keep rather than being born to be the best friend that we all know they can be we have a situation on our hands that WE created and only WE can stop.

Since I am very much against breeding then I guess I would lean towards no slaughter. This is a problem of the people. People should be responsible for the animal from birth to death -like your kids. When your kid doesn't bring home all "A's" do you sell him out for the neighbor's kid who is a genius? If your kid isn't going to be the rocket scientist that you have given him the "breeding" to be that rocket scientist what do you do when he is born into this world and never get beyond the mentality of a 2 year old? Do you put him in the "bound for institution" bin and then go to the lab to redo the scientific experiment to see if you can get it right this time? How many of us really want to pass on our traits?? Just because you love your mare and want to pass on her loving personality, she may very well give birth to the devil's spawn.

Yes, a trip to your local pound (aka:doggy death row) will enlighten anywonethat there are not as many people out there that think the same way.

If I seemed a little casual earlier make no mistake on where I stand. This is where my belief in karma has to come into my mind - gets me thru -May the person who bred those horses, refused lifetime responsibility and a led them ultimately to their horrifying death - back atcha.
Kristie (who secretly hopes she's speaking for other people also!)

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

[This message was edited by equinelaundry on Feb. 07, 2004 at 07:49 PM.]

[This message was edited by equinelaundry on Feb. 07, 2004 at 07:51 PM.]

lindac

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:30 PM

I am in the middle of the road when it comes to slaughtering horses. I WISH that it wouldn't be necessary but what are we to do with all these excess horses?

I think educating people to stop breeding horses because they have an itch to fill an empty uterus or have a cute baby hanging around, is where we should start with our efforts to reduce horse slaughter.

Also, if it is going to be done (and you know that it is a necessary evil right now) then for goodness sakes a more humane bolt gun should be developed that kills on the first shot.

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:36 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by lindac:
I am in the middle of the road when it comes to slaughtering horses. I WISH that it wouldn't be necessary but what are we to do with all these excess horses?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whether or not there is truly an excess of horses in this country is not cut and dried. You might try searching for slaughter topics with the search function here on these forums to get some statistics on the subject. (I think the issue in this thread is more the actual treatment at the plants rather than the entire issue).

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

silver

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:
Why don't you email them and ask where the videos were shot? What you see in that video is _perfectly legal_ in the US.

I've seen footage from within one of the TX plants, shot within the past year that looked very similiar, only you could hear the horse scream in a sound I've never heard a horse make in my life as it was on the 3rd or 4th stun.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't know why you're taking this so personally. I admited that I am not a big fan of these kinds of shock tactics. I don't think they help much with public opinion when presented in this way (ie without context). I am not a big fan or animal rights organizations. I openly question their motivations and honesty. And I do so after knowing several people who were deeply involved with them.

I am not questioning you or the person who posted this. I'm not saying things like this don't happen or that I wouldn't change it if I could. If you really want to make a difference get involved with the legislative process. And maybe try not attacking potential allies next time.

I'm certainly not giving my email address to any more people who will doubtlessly bombard me with junk mail http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:44 PM

silver, I'm not sure I understand your reply - where have I attacked you? I've simply made a suggestion for you if you'd like to find out when and where the video was shot, and telling you that I've seen similiar video that I know was shot from within the US, and recently. Get a freebie email address if you don't want them to have your email.

The only thing I take personally about this entire thread is that I am a horse owner who finds the entire process of slaughter unacceptable.

And lastly, I'm going to try to understand that you have no idea about who I am (nor should you, I really don't care to share on a public forum) or what I do to try to better the lives of horses in this country, legislatively and otherwise. But please, don't assume.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

carepnoctumstable

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:55 PM

HI,
I would just like to say that Slaughter is NOT a neccasary evil.You will her alot "where would all the horses go"I can get some info together to tell you about that.At one point a few years ago we were slaughtering about 500,000 horse a year,Then down to about 250k.Once one of the slaughter houses closed the number decreased.As more plants closed the number of horse being slaughterd went down.If most of these who where "unwanted" the figures don't make sense.The number of horses that are slaughtered is a result of horses being bought by slaughter buyers.Most people sell their horses not knowing that they will be killed.
As for making horse slaughter illegal,The bill would make transporting horses to Canada,Mexico or anyhwhere across the border to be slaughtred illegal.Also rendering plants would still be able to render dead horses for things other than food,like hide,hair hooves for glue.Like I said before there is alot of info out there that needs to be read.Last year about 50k horses were slaughterd.I agree that breeders need to cut back as that is a big problem.SAdly I have seen several videos like that and they aren't rare.This type of thing happens alot.I know a few people who went into a horse slaughterhourse and that video if pretty much on track.I know someone who lives next dorr to one of the slaughterhourse.I can get her webistte info if anyone would like.It a good site without some of the Radical contect that other sites have.It is all facts,not fabrication.-Nicole

silver

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I've seen footage from within one of the TX plants, shot within the past year that looked very similiar, only you could hear the horse scream in a sound I've never heard a horse make in my life as it was on the 3rd or 4th stun. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think this was the part I really took exception to. It seemed to imply that I couldn't possibly understand and that I was being dismissive of the horse's suffering by questioning the origins of the videos. Otherwise I don't really see the relevance of that paragrpah.

And I'm not assuming anything. Maybe you are leading the fight to regulate horse slaughter in Wash DC. However, if you were, I would think that you would agree with me that you are taking a more effective route to doing something. Rather than taking the rather condescending tone that you took in your last post <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I am going to try to understand that you have no idea about who I am <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Again if that's not how you meant it then I apologize.

Remember, you do not know who I am either.

silver

Feb. 7, 2004, 04:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by carepnoctumstable:
.Once one of the slaughter houses closed the number decreased.As more plants closed the number of horse being slaughterd went down.If most of these who where "unwanted" the figures don't make sense. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>YOu can't say that until you also calculate how many horses are going to rescues, illegal rodeos or are being seized or destroyed by Animal Control.

Again please understand that I am being Devil's Advocate here.

Two Toofs

Feb. 7, 2004, 05:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by silver:
I think this was the part I really took exception to. It seemed to imply that I couldn't possibly understand and that I was being dismissive of the horse's suffering by questioning the origins of the videos. Otherwise I don't really see the relevance of that paragrpah.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only thing it meant was that I've never before in my life heard a horse make a sound like the one that horse in the video I saw made. Nothing less, nothing more. The subject at hand IS videos of horses being slaughtered afterall.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Remember, you do not know who I am either.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nor did I presume to tell you what you should or should not be doing in regards to horse slaughter in this country.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

vxf111

Feb. 7, 2004, 05:06 PM

You can be for or against slaughter in the abstract, but I think it's hard to argue that slaughter shouldn't be AS HUMANE AS POSSIBLE. What I see in those videos is NOT HUMANE. And having worked in an animal research lab and had firsthand experiences at a slaughterhouse, I can tell you that there are FAR MORE HUMANE WAYS to slaughter a horse. I'm not going to get into the pro- or anti- slaughter debate because I don't think it's really to the point. THAT sort of slaughter is inhumane and cruel. There's no need for cruelty, even if slaughter is a necessity.

~Veronica

"The Son Dee Times"
"Sustained"

Feb. 7, 2004, 07:29 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>As for making horse slaughter illegal,The bill would make transporting horses to Canada,Mexico or anyhwhere across the border to be slaughtred illegal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you need to check your facts. One of the biggest arguments for not passing the bill is that these horses WILL get shipped across the border to places where we cannot regulate the process, in addition to the effect of long-distance shipping on the horses.

I would really like to know when and where this video took place. Considering that the AVMA and the AAEP (American Association of Equine Practitioners) state that captive bolt IS the method used at U.S. processing facilities. Also consider that last year several top AAEP member visited a slaughter plant (unannounced) to observe the process. Every single one agreed that it was a humane process. Come on people, these are vets for crying out loud.

For anyone who is interested, here is a copy of the AAEP's position statement on the bill. The AAEP's sole existence is to protect the health and welfare of the horse. (I have bolded certain phrases for emphasis)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>AN EQUINE VETERINARY VIEW OF H.R. 857 AND

Approximately 55,000 horses are slaughtered each year in the United States. These horses are most often sent to a processing facility because they are no longer serviceable, are infirm, dangerous, or their owners are no longer able to care for them. The American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP), a professional association with a membership of 7,500 equine veterinarians and veterinary students worldwide, is dedicated to protecting the health and welfare of the horse and considers horse slaughter to be an important welfare issue for the entire equine industry.

The AAEP has examined the transportation of horses to slaughter and their subsequent processing for over a decade. The AAEP’s position on this issue states that the slaughter of unwanted horses at processing facilities is currently a necessary aspect of the equine industry in order to provide a humane alternative to allowing a horse to continue a life of discomfort or pain and possibly inadequate care or abandonment.

The AAEP is not pro-slaughter; we are pro-welfare of the horse. Our association believes slaughter is not the most desirable option for addressing the problem of unwanted horses. However, if a horse owner is not able or willing to provide humane care, the AAEP believes that euthanasia at a processing facility is a humane alternative to a life of suffering, inadequate care and possibly abandonment.

Regarding H.R. 857, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act, the AAEP would consider supporting its passage if the following revisions were made to the bill:

I. Funding of care for unwanted horses. While H.R. 857 states that federal funds may be appropriated to care for horses that are confiscated from violators of this act (that is, those who are illegally transporting horses for slaughter), this provision does not address financial support for unwanted horses that are voluntarily given up by their owners.

Assuming an average cost of $5 per day for providing a horse’s basic needs, the funding needed per year, per horse is approximately $1,825. This does not include veterinary and farrier care. The AAEP is concerned that horse rescue and retirement groups in the United States will not have adequate resources, without federal funding, to meet a potential increase in owner “giveups.”

II. Development of a specific enforcement plan to stop illegal transporters. Slaughter plants exist in Mexico and Canada. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 28,542 horses from the U.S. were exported to Canada for slaughter in 2002. If humane slaughter is banned in the United States, it is imperative that U.S. authorities aggressively enforce the law to prevent a black market of horses transported out of country. H.R. 857 does not specify which federal, state or local agencies will be asked to help enforce the act or in what capacity they will be used. The illegal shipment of U.S. horses to foreign countries presents many welfare concerns. Horses will be on transport vehicles for much longer periods of time. More importantly, USDA humane transport regulations and oversight do not apply to foreign plants. Nor will USDA veterinarians be on site at the foreign slaughter plants to ensure proper handling of the horses and their humane euthanasia.

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) in 2000 issued its recommendations on acceptable methods of euthanasia for horses and other animals. Captive bolt, which is the method used at U.S. processing facilities, is considered an acceptable and humane method of euthanasia by veterinarians. There is no guarantee that humane methods will be used in non-U.S. facilities.

The AAEP believes that the transport of horses to foreign slaughter facilities greatly jeopardizes the health and welfare of the horse. If H.R. 857 is passed, it is crucial that a specific plan to stop the illegal transport of horses be in place and enforced. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

[This message was edited by kt on Feb. 07, 2004 at 10:39 PM.]

hunt_jump

Feb. 7, 2004, 07:33 PM

Ok, those videos clips were horrifying, but not beyond what I expected after several school readings (some fictional and some non-fiction) dealing with slaughterhouses (though not horse slaughter). I have a horse that I have been unable to locate (disappeared while on trial) for several years and I fear every day that there might be a possibility that he ended up in a place like this. But, I must admit that like silver my first thought was wondering where these videos came from. I do not doubt that horses are being slaughtered inhumanely today in this country and I want to see that changed, yet I still wondered. That says to me that the efforts and tactics of this group are not the way to change the current state of affairs.

~ hunt_jump ~
http://home.cfl.rr.com/huntjump

equinelaundry

Feb. 7, 2004, 08:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:
Come on people, these are vets for crying out loud. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

[This message was edited by kt on Feb. 07, 2004 at 10:39 PM.][/QUOTE]

I mean no disrespect, honestly, but please. Don't get me started on that. The rescues that I have done have seen or glanced at by many a vet. I'm not attacking you but you must have the most moral & ethical & compassionate vet that walks the earth. Each of my rescues has come from barns or homes where vets are there on a regular basis. One horse came to me that couldn't register on the body scale. His vet was mine. Of course the vet will never see any of my animals again and if anyone asks I don't lie.

This is a political game - make no mistake about it. Every elected official HAS to make his constituents happy. If slaughter houses/rendering plants are in a certain state then those elected officials and the vets employed by the government or an entity ofare calling the shots. That's a pretty cushy job and one that is hard to get fired from UNLESS you would be the one to say.....eeekkkk, can we maybe do this in a different way?.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

SBT

Feb. 7, 2004, 08:40 PM

The look on the gray mare's face is heartbreaking. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/cry.gif Regardless of the politics involved, there MUST be a better way than this. Naturally, better = more expensive, but I don't care. Raise my taxes. Animals should NOT have to suffer for the convenience of humans.

Now, I'm not against eating meat, and I'm not against using animal products. I AM against inhumane treatment of ALL animals. Especially horses, because they just can't be handled like cattle. A cow's neck is short; a horse's is long and very flexible. They just aren't the same, and can't be treated the same.

Perhaps if gov't/USDA restrictions made it more expensive to slaughter horses, the practice would stop altogether.

Heart in a horse is every bit as important as it is in a person. ~Jimmy Cruise

CrossedWings

Feb. 7, 2004, 10:17 PM

Sorry, while I do not condone in ANY WAY the in-humane treatment of horses (or any other animal for that matter) I will not be one to eliminate horse slaughter. My feeling on the entire issue is based on many things; however my overall feeling is that we should be working to create a system in which animals are properly treated as they head off to their fate; and the process by which they are "terminated" is humane, immediate, and painless.

I would like to add that by eliminating horse slaughter completely you could be creating a market much like that of the cattle market right now in North America (minus all slaughter).... Not quite the same but that's the direction the general horse market would go.....

I have one question:

Will eliminating horse slaughter stop or significantly lessen the amount of horse killing (by other means deemed inappropriate methods of killing by "us.")?

While I'd never send my own to a slaughter, and I do not par-take in activities that could force me to seek an "easy" route; I could not help in stopping horse slaughter... What worries me, is that if we take horse slaughter out of the picture, what are people, who are desperate, perhaps short in cash (or brain cells) going to do to their horses? Slaughter, like it or not, is an easy route for some of these people; having a vet euthanize is expensive and time consuming for some of them.... I'd hate to think of people taking a shot-gun to the back of their horses head(s), or just neglecting their horses leaving them to starve and die a long, painful death...... It's not pretty, but people will seek other "easy" options if slaughter is eliminated; and I wonder if slaughter isn't the lesser evil of the other options some people might take.........

*Flame Suit On* - Fire away!

(EDITED to bold my question!!)

Quote for the week:

"Never under-estimate the power of stupid people in large numbers." - Shirt Slogan

[This message was edited by CrossedWings on Feb. 08, 2004 at 09:18 AM.]

poltroon

Feb. 7, 2004, 11:03 PM

We need to stop worrying about the red herring of "slaughter for human consumption."

It is not the end use of the carcass that is the problem. It is not the end use of the carcass that is inhumane.

What is important is that animals killed for any reason - be it human consumption, dog food, zoo animal food, rendering, old age, horrible injury or lingering illness - be killed humanely, quickly and cleanly.

Any plant or facility, that kills animals of any species for any reason, that regularly causes suffering should be prosecuted under the law. We need to change the law to make this more possible. As consumers we need to make educated choices to ensure that the meat we eat is treated with respect.

I do not believe that the bill currently pending will make things better. It will only add regulation and red tape, while allowing people to pretend that something useful has been accomplished.

Albion

Feb. 7, 2004, 11:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>why not educate people to stop breeding <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since this is a country where people still persist in purchasing puppies from puppy mills and brokers (many of which are also pretty deplorable conditions for any living creature to live in), where people insist on keeping cats and dogs that are only pet quality - nothing exemplary - intact (and better yet, let them roam the streets), where thousands of unwanted dogs and cats are put to sleep in shelters every day, and where a number of HUMANS seem to be woefully uneducated in how to stop procreating (just look at the number of unwanted pregnancies that could've been prevented by *gasp* regular use of contraceptives - there is a woman in my mother's office who has a horde of children she's barely able to support as a single mother (I think 7), and she JUST clued in to the fact that birth control can be a good thing.) - I think the task of educating people to stop breeding horses willy-nilly is a tall order. A noble one, to be sure, but I think there's an unfortunate idea in this country that because something has a uterus or testicles, it should be kept intact and should be bred. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

PinkPony

Feb. 8, 2004, 12:34 AM

I have to say that was extremely disturbing, even though I have seen first hand cattle, sheep and pig slaughter. The slaughters I have seen were done in a much more professional and efficient manner: a single effective hit by the captive bolt gun. It really helps to have someone that understands they are living feeling animals, but probably very hard to find someone like that to do this for a living.

Dancing Lawn

Feb. 8, 2004, 03:59 AM

I've been complaining about the way animals are treated in Canada for a long time. It's a long hard road, but I think we may be making some progress. Not much, but a bit. To pass along what I've learned: I had dinner the other night with Ovid Jackson and his wife, Verona. For those of you who don't know, Ovid is our Member of Parliament (Federal) for Grey/Bruce. What he told me was, any one can sign a petition. Usually, someone will sign because they have been asked to, by a friend or family member, and they will sign it, without really being fully aware of the issues involved. In other words, without being fully informed. So, government officials don't realy pay much attention to petitions, or take them very seriously. What they DO take seriously, is a handwritten letter, from an individual. It means that someone has taken the time, made the effort, and cares deeply enough about the issue, to write it down, and mail it. If they get enough letters on a subject, they sit up and listen. The more indivduals that write in, and are clear about what they are concerned about, the more likely that issue will get some official attention.
So, write some letters. Do your research, don't ramble on and make false statements, and it doesn't have to be long. In fact, (unlike this post) the shorter, the better. Check your facts, check your grammar and spelling, and mail it out.

less hard work, more fine dining.
www.dancinglawnhorses.com (http://www.dancinglawnhorses.com) updated Dec. 29/03

If guys can do it, how hard can it be?

okggo

Feb. 8, 2004, 04:48 AM

Ok, I debated on and off about whether to look at the videos and pictures on equineadvocates.com. Morbid curiosity got the best of me, and I watched the first video and looked at the photos until I got to the pic of that beautiful chestnut knocked out on the ground surrounded in blood, and that was my limit. I have not been that affected by photos ever- that really got to me.
My question for you guys who understand the process, how does that gun work? Does it stun them, or kill them instantly? And then after they are down they cut them open to bleed out? Please tell me they are dead when they bleed them out- that is all I want to know....or are they just stunned and unconscious?

My filly’s motto:“when in doubt, run yourself into a frenzy, and impale yourself on a gate.”

Daydream Believer

Feb. 8, 2004, 05:48 AM

okkgo,

The law only requires the horses to be unconcious when bled out...not dead. I would say from those videos, that that is a real possibility however that guy was bolting them 3-4 times. I really hope he was thoroughly killing them with all that stunning. The bolt gun shoots a "bolt" into the horse when it fires. If it's done right, it should instantly kill a horse. The problem is that there is a very small spot on the horses forehead where it can be accurately and humanely used to render the horse instantly dead. Miss it by a little, and you have a wounded suffering horse. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif From what I saw on that video, this guys aim was not very good and none of the horses were exactly standing perfectly still either to make it easier on him to be accurate.

I did not start this thread to debate slaughter...I started it in the hope of saving one horse from such an awful fate. I may burn in hell for causing such a debate on this board but I have seen so many threads here where folks who have never seen horses slaughtered (me either until this) thought somehow it was always humanely done with regard to the horses emotions and suffering. I have helped slaughter pigs, chickens and cows as a girl and we never allowed animals to suffer like this. I did not see that in those videos at all. I saw terrified horses in a panicked highly agitated state. I saw terrible cruelty when that bolt gun was used on that horse's shoulder. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif That is just unacceptable. If it takes outlawing horse slaugter to stop cruelty like this, than so be it. Yes, there might be a few more horses starving to death in some back yard but HELLO, there already is and slaughter is still legal! We need stiffer laws to protect animals in our country and much harsher punishment for those who do mistreat animals. Yes, we also need education to stop folks from breeding indiscriminately.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

CrossedWings

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by okggo:
My question for you guys who understand the process, how does that gun work? Does it stun them, or kill them instantly? And then after they are down they cut them open to bleed out? Please tell me they are dead when they bleed them out- that is all I want to know....or are they just stunned and unconscious?

.”_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is my understanding of the process that the animal is stunned by the gun and is rendered unconscious throughout the ordeal. From what I've been told the animals are unconscious during the ordeal but are not dead; however I have also been assured that while technically "alive" by the point they get to bleeding out and such the animals have no sense of awareness or pain; they are "practically" dead by that point, but not technically.....

That's what I've been told anyway; either way I sickens me that they are killed instantly; because I'm sure more than one horse has made it to be bled out and is conscious enough to feel pain and that should NEVER happen; no animal deserves that......

(Edited for typo)

[This message was edited by CrossedWings on Feb. 08, 2004 at 09:50 AM.]

silver

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> It really helps to have someone that understands they are living feeling animals, but probably very hard to find someone like that to do this for a living. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Meat packing used to be a unionized job. Now it is performed by undertrained and under paid transient workers. A HUGE part of the problem. Read Fast Food Nation for a better explanation.

And DB, I don't think anyone is going to rot in hell for debating, I don't even believe in hell http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I personally don't support the anti-slaughter bill for a number of reasons, probably best illustrated by the AAEP document. It hasn't been well thought out, it's vague and there is no menchanism or funding for enforcing it. Those last two are the two single most imortant things in regulation. I think if the current laws were routinely and effectively enforced then we might not need any new legislation.

PalominoLover

Feb. 8, 2004, 07:43 AM

That is really just awful. Its enough to make you want to cry.

Feb. 8, 2004, 08:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:

I mean no disrespect, honestly, but please. Don't get me started on that. The rescues that I have done have seen or glanced at by many a vet. I'm not attacking you but you must have the most moral & ethical & compassionate vet that walks the earth. Each of my rescues has come from barns or homes where vets are there on a regular basis. One horse came to me that couldn't register on the body scale. His vet was mine. Of course the vet will never see any of my animals again and if anyone asks I don't lie.

This is a political game - make no mistake about it. Every elected official HAS to make his constituents happy. If slaughter houses/rendering plants are in a certain state then those elected officials _and the vets employed by the government or an entity of_are calling the shots. That's a pretty cushy job and one that is hard to get fired from UNLESS you would be the one to say.....eeekkkk, can we maybe do this in a different way?.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you are missing the point. I am not talking about your vet, I am not talking about my vet. I am talking about a handful of the TOP vets in the country, who know what they are talking about and have the credentials, background and experience to prove it. They had nothing to gain by lying or glossing over what they saw. And I think it's a pretty big leap to assume that just because these plants are federally regulated that it is some giant evil political conspiracy of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." How do you reach that conclusion?

Again, I want to know when and where this video was shot, and I doubt contacting the people whose site it's on will produce a straight answer-- again, because as the AAEP and AVMA state, captive bolt IS the method used by U.S. facilties.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Two Toofs

Feb. 8, 2004, 08:35 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:
because as the AAEP and AVMA state, captive bolt IS the method used by U.S. facilties.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The captive bolt method is what you see in the videos - minus the "adequate restraint", which according to the AMVA is necessary for the captive bolt to be humane when used on a horse. (restrain which no slaughter house in the US provides, nor do they even claim to).

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

horse_poor

Feb. 8, 2004, 08:41 AM

i went to the site and couldnt bring myself to watch the videos

this subject distresses me to no end http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

molly
*member of just about every clique*
http://community.webshots.com/user/mavw1971

www.oasisequestrian.com (http://www.oasisequestrian.com)

cgn38

Feb. 8, 2004, 09:01 AM

GHAZZU
Funny you should mention it, but I do volunteer at a humane society shelter. That is precisely why I said "GOOD" people. I tried to choose my words carefully. Good people keep their dogs for life.
So, just to reiterate the idea of this topic - please people, stop bringing so many horses into the world.

DMK

Feb. 8, 2004, 10:11 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by okggo:
My question for you guys who understand the process, how does that gun work? Does it stun them, or kill them instantly? And then after they are down they cut them open to bleed out? Please tell me they are dead when they bleed them out- that is all I want to know....or are they just stunned and unconscious?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have always understood that the purpose of the humane killer/firearm is to render the animal immediately brain dead. Brain death, to the best of our understanding, means that the animal does not feel pain (it is also worth noting that the brain itself does not feel pain). However, brain dead does not mean that the heart has stopped beating. The few minutes of heart beats help drain the carcass of blood, which is critical to processing .

But IF the animal has been properly stunned, it is brain dead, and does not feel anything and the rest of the organs would cease functioning in a few minutes even if the carcass was not beld out. Also, if the animal has been properly stunned and is brain dead, it may still have tremors for a few minutes.

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." - Kierkegaard

equinelaundry

Feb. 8, 2004, 11:13 AM

kt: Honestly, I don't want to argue with you but I really don't care what a "top vet" has to say about slaughter house practices. I will defend my position that this is a political issue and vets CAN be swayed - matters not the vet or their education. Surely you don't think the wording in the Bill was written by a politician? Vets, possibly some that had toured the facilities http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif provided the wording for the Bill. Again, I mean no disrespect, but if you think this doesn't happen on a regular basis then you need a little more exposure. You could go see for yourself instead of taking the word of an educated man.

A dear friend sent me this quote:

"The image of the world around us that science provides is highly deficient. It supplies a lot of factual information, and puts all our experience in magnificently coherent order, but keeps terribly silent about everything close to our hearts, everything that really counts."
Erwin Schrodinger, Nobel Prize Winner in Physics, 1933

We really need something more than a "top vet" with credientials & experience to "prove it", that is, convince us that the process is humane start to finish. When is the last time some of them actually worked in a crisis setting with a person and their beloved animal instead of having lunch with the big boys & talk about the newest million dollar treatment they can scam us with or how to deal with mad cow/bird flu disease? In order to get to those top positions you've had to "turn off" your emotions and compassion at some point. Some use science as an escape BUT it is science that has proven that animals have emotions - obviously fear and pain are but two of them.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

riveau

Feb. 8, 2004, 11:27 AM

I have some questions that maybe someone can shed some light upon.

We all know that the horsemeat exported from the United States for human consumption goes to Europe and Japan. I'd like to know how we can export meat when it's obviously contaminated with medications (the horses that go to slaughter were not raised to be consumed-they may have been given all sorts of substances not approved for animals for human consumption). For instance, I'm highly allergic to sulfa drugs. Horses are commonly given sulfa antibiotics and it clearly states on the bottle "not to be used in livestock intended for human consumption". A horseburger made from a horse recently treated for an infection with sulfa could put me in the hospital.

What really baffles me is this: How could Europeans- who are so afraid of genetically modified corn and soy bean- willingly gooble down our cast-off horses who are contaminated with god knows what?

----------------------------
"You can observe a lot by watching." -Yogi Berra

http://community.webshots.com/user/cadeau_flambe

Ghazzu

Feb. 8, 2004, 11:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:
_We really need something more than a "top vet" with credientials & experience to "prove it", that is, convince us that the process is humane start to finish. When is the last time some of them actually worked in a crisis setting with a person and their beloved animal instead of having lunch with the big boys & talk about the newest million dollar treatment they can scam us with or how to deal with mad cow/bird flu disease? In order to get to those top positions you've had to "turn off" your emotions and compassion at some point. Some use science as an escape BUT it is science that has proven that animals have emotions - obviously fear and pain are but two of them.

.**<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For most of the membership of the AAEP, I'd say that the last time they helped an animal and owner in crisis would be measuered in hours or days.

If you truly think that this is the make up of the committees of the AAEP, then you are more irrational than you appear at first glance.
The leadership of AAEP is made up of practicing veterinarians who volunteer their time and expertise.

Try not to be so blinded by emotion that you are unable to perceive reality.

Unashamed member of the Arab clique...just settin' on the Group W bench.

WHS

Feb. 8, 2004, 11:57 AM

I haven't watched these videos yet.Approx 3 years ago I viewed a video of a slaughter operation in which a pregnant mare was hit with the bolt,didn't seem to be quite "out of it",was hung up,bled,and then some guy slit her open and what looked to be a nearly full term foal slid out on the floor and the guy just kicked it aside.THAT was sickening!! I can't remember if it was an activist group which showed the video or what.I had found it on the internet.

Draygonfyne

Feb. 8, 2004, 12:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by cgn38:
GHAZZU
Good people keep their dogs for life.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry...have to disagree. "Good" people are those who, when they realize that life situations are such that they can no longer keep their pet, put the time and effort into finding it a good home. Just because someone decides they can't keep a dog for life does not make them a bad person.....

Please.... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

www.draygonfynedesign.ca (http://www.draygonfynedesign.ca)

Albion

Feb. 8, 2004, 12:37 PM

Draygonfyne, how right you are - although some on this board would take issue with that. I got my dog from a very nice guy who had a drastic change in circumstances over a period of months - he wound up having to sell his house & move to a place where he could not have dogs, on top of a lot of other financial problems. He had gotten Torres at the age of 6 months - she was a little over 2 when I got her. He was quite misty eyed when he & his girlfriend dropped her off - I still email him with updates. He did the right thing for her - she has a permanent home with me & is happy as a clam (currently snoozing on my pillows!). He interviewed a number of people before finally settling on a new home for her ... it certainly wasn't willy-nilly 'Let's drop the dog off at the pound, we're bored with her' decision. He was very upset that he had to give her up - but happy that she found another great home. We didn't sign any paperwork, but we DID agree that if I ever couldn't care for her or had to give her up for some reason, I would contact him first - which I fully intend on doing if (and it's a HUGE if) a situation ever arises.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

equinelaundry

Feb. 8, 2004, 12:52 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ghazzu:
For most of the membership of the AAEP, I'd say that the last time they helped an animal and owner in crisis would be measuered in hours or days.[QUOTE]

As stated earlier, there are some vets that are "appointed" to positions.

[QUOTE]If you truly think that this is the make up of the committees of the AAEP, then you are more irrational than you appear at first glance.[QUOTE]

As stated earlier, this involves more than the AAEP. I've worked in politics for several years and come from a politically outspoken family. I am quite aware of government. I am also working on legislation and I am also starting a network of experienced equine vets and farriers to donate their time and expertise to assist with local AC officers in neglect cases since most have no specialized training in large animals except euthanasia this information comes directly from the National Association of Animal Control Officers. I really try to not run my mouth unless I can back up my words.

[QUOTE]The leadership of AAEP is made up of practicing veterinarians who volunteer their time and expertise.[QUOTE]

No argument there. Again, you are focusing on just little bits and pieces of the posts. Instead of narrowing in on something that pisses you off, take a breath and read all posts from all posters. You might want to re-read my first post or 2 that clearly states that I usually don't post on these subjects AND it explains where I stand on my sig. below. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[QUOTE]Try not to be so blinded by emotion that you are unable to perceive reality.[QUOTE]

If you are a breeder or a vet then I can see where you would be quite offended by my posts http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif. Honestly, you don't know me from Adam. I'd appreciate it if you keep your opinions to yourself about my "emotions" or "irrationality" off a public BB. You have no idea what you are talking about. If you feel the need to get personal please do so via e-mail or PT.

As I said, I don't post on these subjects and now I remember why - the minds are made up.

Again, the topic was about the humane methods. We should get back to that. As long as the methods are humane enough why in the world should we worry about our own horses the fate of the horses in pics. & videos? That group of vets would say it was a one-time only violation and only on that particular day. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I have such a busy week. Please, if anyone want to flame me please know that I'm up to eyeballs in work this week and won't be able to defend this post for at least a week! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

moose

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Daydream Believer:
I have helped slaughter pigs, chickens and cows as a girl and we never allowed animals to suffer like this. I did not see that in those videos at all.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh really...you can see it in these videos.

Cows Pigs Chickens (http://www.factoryfarming.com/gallery/photos_video.htm)

Funny thing about the internet, you can get video on practically anything. Do you know if the horse video's are from the US? I noticed that site states nothing. The internet is filled with videos of animal slaughter all over Europe and the rest of the world.

In what capacity did you slaughter animals?

luckyduck

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:33 PM

Okay...did any one else read through that vet thing...

They support PMU mare farms, but then in their statement about slaughter houses they say it is the HUMAN owners responsibility to take care of the equine throughout it's life...

WELL....when you are breeding for urine and it HAS to come from a pregnant mare....the damn by-product is the foals....so I guess it is okay to just dump them at auctons right?

Can't support one and then make a statement like that.

This whole situation is hard for me. I had a cow that I raised that my exhusband thought it would be nice refenge to send him to slaughter while I was at work.....Like anyone at the plant would have thought that he was a pet....other then the huge clue he was clean, very tame and had a halter with a name plate on it! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

www.westwindfarm.net (http://www.westwindfarm.net)
Home of the real Luckyduck & West Winds Ricky Martin

LLDM

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:38 PM

There is only one way to even begin to solve this in any way that makes logical sense over the long term.

Licenses for owning a horse. Licences for breeding horses. Licenses for farms that keep horses. Tracking ID's for all horses. This would include taxes on owners, farms and horses themselves to manage this process. Are you willing to do that?

If not, shut up. If so, put your money and effort toward that.

If I were given the option, I would chose a quick, horrid death over a slow, horrid death. In nature, those are the only options. Here in civilization, we could only control it as described above.

I will happily pony up taxes on all my horses. The very nice registered, inspected few that I breed. And the one's I "rescued". And my farm. I would take any test, submit to any inspection process, file any paperwork to prove the health and welfare of any of my animals.

Would you?

We can argue all day, but, there of just too many ways a horse can die "badly". Like most things, the only way to really stop it is at the source. The source is people who do not understand what they are doing and/or don't care to.

SCFarm

Mostly Harmless

YoungFilly

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:41 PM

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I had thought that the bolt gun was supposed to be less cruel than a bullet. Obviously not.

People, the world is cruel. Thats just the way it is. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Palomino Leopard WB

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:41 PM

Moose...can you really say you looked at those video's and did not see animals suffering? What I saw were horses that knew what was coming and were giving it their best to fight for what life they had left. Animals being bolted as other were being bled out etc. tell me they didn't know what was going on.
Now I am not against slaughter of animals, even horses as unfortunately it is necessary as so many animals are breed etc. that cannot be used. What I am for is a more humane way to transport and to kill an animal and make it's last moments perhaps not so stressful.

moose

Feb. 8, 2004, 01:50 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by LLDM:
There is only one way to even begin to solve this in any way that makes logical sense over the long term.

Licenses for owning a horse. Licences for breeding horses. Licenses for farms that keep horses. Tracking ID's for all horses. This would include taxes on owners, farms and horses themselves to manage this process. Are you willing to do that?

If not, shut up. If so, put your money and effort toward that.

If I were given the option, I would chose a quick, horrid death over a slow, horrid death. In nature, those are the only options. Here in civilization, we could only control it as described above.

I will happily pony up taxes on all my horses. The very nice registered, inspected few that I breed. And the one's I "rescued". And my farm. I would take any test, submit to any inspection process, file any paperwork to prove the health and welfare of any of my animals. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that ultimately that is where the animal ID tracking is leading towards that but for different reasons. What you talk of above does make sense for me, but I also see that as leading towards horses being deemed strictly as companion animals and that legally many thing will change in how the states and townships view them. Along with the agricultural status that could be lost, is there a danger in zoning? If a horse is deemed companion does that affect whether zoning will allow you to keep them and how?

moose

Feb. 8, 2004, 02:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Palomino Leopard WB:
Moose...can you really say you looked at those video's and did not see animals suffering? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

PLWB, if someone didn't look at the video's and see suffering and wasn't bothered by them I would be worried and a bit frightened for them.

I think Poltroon express's my views best in her post:
"<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>We need to stop worrying about the red herring of "slaughter for human consumption."

It is not the end use of the carcass that is the problem. It is not the end use of the carcass that is inhumane.

What is important is that animals killed for any reason - be it human consumption, dog food, zoo animal food, rendering, old age, horrible injury or lingering illness - be killed humanely, quickly and cleanly.

Any plant or facility, that kills animals of any species for any reason, that regularly causes suffering should be prosecuted under the law. We need to change the law to make this more possible. As consumers we need to make educated choices to ensure that the meat we eat is treated with respect.

I do not believe that the bill currently pending will make things better. It will only add regulation and red tape, while allowing people to pretend that something useful has been accomplished. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The sad fact is that Factory Slaughterhouses are the way of the present and the future. You can try to establish pressure to see that all animals don't endure horrendous conditions, if not for ethics, than at least for your own health.

I think trying to get people to understand that horse slaughter exists is fine and trying to get people to think of euthenasia as the humane alternative is fine, but in the end I simply do not think that trying to ban the horse altogether from that cycle will in the end benefit the horse or really work. I really do think that those animals alternatives will end up in longer trailer rides out of country and longer stays in deplorable situations.

Ghazzu

Feb. 8, 2004, 02:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:

If you are a breeder or a vet then I can see where you would be quite offended by my posts http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am both a breeder and a vet. And yes, I think your attitude is offensive. And yes, I *do* rescue, as a matter of fact.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
Honestly, you don't know me from Adam. I'd appreciate it if you keep your opinions to yourself about my "emotions" or "irrationality" off a public BB.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do you know the president and officers of the AAEP well?
Doubt it. Doesn't seem to have stopped you from accusing them of being uncaring profiteers who are interested in "ripping off" horseowners though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
You have no idea what you are talking about.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right back atcha.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
Again, the topic was about the humane methods.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have no problem whatsoever with that. I've said often enough that the energy put into trying to "outlaw" equine slaughter would be better spent in enforcement of existing rules and regulations which mandate humane treatment in shipping and slaughter.

Unashamed member of the Arab clique...just settin' on the Group W bench.

LLDM

Feb. 8, 2004, 03:32 PM

Moose - The ID# proposed right now for agricultural animals is mostly about disease tracking. Mostly in reaction to "mad cow" and the avian flu issues in the Far East. I believe horses will never be classified strictly as companion animals, since they require an agricultural environment.

Most zoning laws already restrict horse keeping in urban or semi-urban areas. I really don't know if that would be affected, but it seems more a "reasonable use" zoning issue to me, and up to individual localities.

It is as difficult to legislate common sense as it is to keep people from getting in over their heads, or trying to make a quick buck. As much as I hate slaughter, as much as it breaks my heart and makes me ill, I still think it is better a quick, all be it horrid end, than a slow lingering death full of pain, suffering and loneliness. Only if we stop the begining of this problem, will we fix the end results either way.

SCFarm

Mostly Harmless

Daydream Believer

Feb. 8, 2004, 03:43 PM

When I said that I helped humanely slaughter chickens, pigs and cows, I was referring to my farmgirl days...not factory farming methods. Chickens were instantly decapitated, pigs and cows shot with a 22 pistol correctly and died instantly. Up to their death, they were calm and not scared out of their wits. They did not have to looks at the gutted bodies of their flock or herd mates prior to dying like those horses did. I am not happy with factory farming and slaughter methods at all.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

onthebit12000

Feb. 8, 2004, 04:18 PM

Hi Everyone,
I am new to this forum, however I am unfortunately, not new to this topic. I am a Thoroughbred trainer based in Chicago, and I have a farm very close to where Cavel International is building its horse slaughter plant.
For many months now, I have been in the forefront of the effort in Illinois to pass a bill(SB 1921) that will ban horse slaughter in our state. I am also, a member of the National Horse Protection Coalition which was formed by the Thoroughbred racing industry, to ensure passage of H. R. 857, the Federal bill that will outlaw horse slaughter in the US, and the transport of horses for slaughter to Mexico and Canada, as well as any other foreign country.
The video you are referring to on the SHARK website, was shot by the Humane Farming Association at one of the Texas plants. This was an undercover video investigation, and is widely known throughout the US. There is also, a CD documentary, filmed in Texas, regarding the states effforts to try to legalize the sale of horsemeat for human consumption in 2003. The bill was overwhelmingly defeated.
To view this CD, please visit www.justsaywhoa.org (http://www.justsaywhoa.org) or www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat/index.htm (http://www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat/index.htm)

These two websites have a great deal of information regarding this issue.

As for the people behind both the federal and Illinois bills, yes, there may be some "animal rights" groups who support this legislation, but the initiatives, were both introduced and are supported and funded by individuals and the Thoroughbred and Standardbred racing and breeding industries as well as virtually all national, state and local humane organizations.
The definative report on horse slaughter is a white paper, commissioned by the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation and researched and reported by an independent firm, entitled " Horse Slaughter: An Unnecessary Evil"
www.trfinc.org (http://www.trfinc.org) This is a must read!! Our horses are counting on each and every one of us to become educated in this subject.
The white paper proves, that we do not have a surplus of horses as the pro-slaughter forces would like us all to believe. This theory of "where will all the horses go" is soundly answered by facts and figures, such as in 1990 500,000 US horses were slaughtered in over a dozen US plants and Canada. In 2002 with only 2 US plants and some export to Canada, 50,000 horses were slaughtered. Well, in the 12 years mentioned here, if we were to be overwhelmed with unwanted horses, wouldn't we have noticed?? Also, if abuse and neglect were to become rampant as the pro-slaughter forces want us to believe, wouldn't we have heard of this too?? Facts prove, that horse slaughter and neglect are two entirely different forms of abuse. California banned horse slaughter 6 years ago, and the instances of abuse and neglect are unchanged. Since the ban, however, the instance of horse theft, has decreased nearly 50%. In Illinois, during the 2 years there has been no horse slaughter, the instances of abuse and neglect have substantially decreased. In Texas, the only state currently home to horse slaughter(2 plants) they have one of the highest rates of abuse and neglect.
The fact is, that over the last decade, we have steadily been addressing the issues of what to do with our horses when they are no longer serviceable. There are literally hundreds of rescue and retirement facilities all across our country. The TB and SB industries stand in the forefront of providing for the proper placement of race horses, post-racing. Many other breed organizations also, have resources in place to address this issue. Noticeably absent of any breed funded rescue and retirement provisions is the AQHA, who by the way has a pro-slaughter stance. The AQHA registers far more horses than any other registry, 300,000 horses every year, and yet makes no effort to provide for these horses. The motto seems to be breed them, breed them, breed them, and when they don't cut the mustard, chop their heads off!! Shame on the AQHA.
Please do not get me wrong, I am in no way trying to say that the racing industry is a knight in shining armor, but at least they are actively addressing this issue.
As for the AVMA/AAEP stance, please, know that these organizations have never polled the memberships. This is not the typical position of the veterinarians. We have a campaign underway that is polling the vets across the US, and many do not stand with the AVMA position regarding acceptance of the captive bolt gun. The AAEP has indicated it will support the federal bill, should certain issues be better addressed.
The AVMA you must remember, is also the group in charge of caring for our food animal species, and as such, to admit that horse slaughter is inhumane, would be admitting that all slaughter is inhumane. I find this to be a cop out! The AVMA guidelines for administering the captive bolt gun to equines clearly calls for "proper head restraint". Well video's do not lie. The horse slaughter plants do not even attempt to restrain the horses heads, resulting in horses having to be "stunned" repeatedly, and often times improperly stunned
horses proceed through the slaughter process alive and conscious.
Horse slaughter exists in our country for one reason and one reason only. GREED!! The greed of the foreign owned plants that line their pockets with the blood of OUR horses, and the greed of the very small minority of horse owners who allow it.
Please visit the National Horse Protection Coalition website at www.horse-protection.org (http://www.horse-protection.org)
Please add your name or stable to the rapidly growing list of coalition members who want to end this horrible tragedy in our country.
In Illinois, please email me privately if you would like to help our efforts to pass SB 1921.

Until the last horse is safe, we will not rest.

moose

Feb. 8, 2004, 04:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by onthebit12000:
California banned horse slaughter 6 years ago, and the instances of abuse and neglect are unchanged. Since the ban, however, the instance of horse theft, has decreased nearly 50%. In Illinois, during the 2 years there has been no horse slaughter, the instances of abuse and neglect have substantially decreased. In Texas, the only state currently home to horse slaughter(2 plants) they have one of the highest rates of abuse and neglect. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for clarifying where the clip came from. Is there anything that can verify that California and Illinois aren't just transporting their unwanted out of state to Texas and Canada?

Against The Wind

Feb. 8, 2004, 04:58 PM

Here, here onthebit12000.

You have a PT.

~~I hear opportunity knocking, but I can't find the door!~~

fernie fox

Feb. 8, 2004, 05:11 PM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

nimby (http://www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat/Suppliers.htm)

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

fernie fox
"I have lived my life-it is nearly done-.I have played the game all round;But I freely admit that the best of my fun I owe it to Horse and Hound".

equinelaundry

Feb. 8, 2004, 05:14 PM

onthebit12000, Thank you for a great post - very well put - and thanks for the clarification on where filming took place. Maybe having it filmed in our own back yard will bring a little reality check back in.

I have done endless research on several issues for equines for almost a year, several hours a day, every day. I have a list of vets that are members of AAEP that have shown quite clearly they are not there for the horse's best interest. This cannot be published on a public forum for obvious reasons.

Thank goodness for organizations like yours that take care of its own. This was one of my original points. Keep up the good work.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

OldLadyOnATB

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:13 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Albion:

Since this is a country where people still persist in purchasing puppies from puppy mills and brokers (many of which are also pretty deplorable conditions for any living creature to live in), where people insist on keeping cats and dogs that are only pet quality - nothing exemplary - intact (and better yet, let them roam the streets), where thousands of unwanted dogs and cats are put to sleep in shelters every day, and where a number of HUMANS seem to be woefully uneducated in how to stop procreating (just look at the number of unwanted pregnancies that could've been prevented by *gasp* regular use of contraceptives - there is a woman in my mother's office who has a horde of children she's barely able to support as a single mother (I think 7), and she JUST clued in to the fact that birth control can be a good thing.) - I think the task of educating people to stop breeding horses willy-nilly is a tall order. A noble one, to be sure, but I think there's an unfortunate idea in this country that because something has a uterus or testicles, it should be kept intact and should be bred. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amen to that! I have been breeding and showing Scottish Terriers for 20 years. We only breed when we would like a puppy to show. The rest are spayed/nuetered and placed in loving companion homes. There have been some that lived out their lives in my home because I never found some one that could provide what that dog deserved to have. Every animal is different and special. It is our duty as their caretakers to see that they are treated humanely. I am responsible for bringing the puppies into the world and I take that responsibilty seriously.

Having said all that (sorry for the lengthy reply....you struck a nerve) horse breeders should consider how much it would cost them to take care of that horse it's entire life should the situation arise that they cannot sell the foal. And more importantly, they should not breed unless they are prepared to take care of the results of the breeding at their hand.

When placing (or selling) an animal, it is the owner's/breeder's responsibilty to screen all prospective buyers for their suitability for the animal in question. They should NEVER be afraid to refuse to sell an animal if it is not the best home available for that animal.

PLease be responsible and be humane. The "slaughter" issue is not really the issue. Those of us involved in the "dog game" know that euthansia is necessary some of the time. Horse owners should realize the same. But the very word "euthansia" should imply mercy by it's very definition.

This is a great conversation, though. Education is the key and open discussion is the best way to enlighten others.....thanks for the link to the videos. It will serve as a constant reminder that there is plenty work still left for us to do!

Elizabeth

After all these years, I have gotten back into horses. God has blessed me and Heaven help me!

Daydream Believer

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:15 PM

Onthebit,

Thanks for the excellent informative post. I strongly suspected for a long time that the bit about abuse and a surplus of unwanted horses was bullcrap. Of course there is abuse but to say it would increase that much by outlawing slaughter as a disposal for unwanted horses is simply crazy. Let's not forget, as onthebit pointed out, how many stolen horses go to slaughter. Very valid and frightening point. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif I could not imagine finding that one of my horse met their death like that. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/cry.gif

Did anyone else notice how nice and healthy those horses looked in those videos? I saw some good looking horses....certainly not all crippled ancient horses like folks like to think go to slaughter. So much for that fallacy too. Having been to a "killer" auction once and having looked into the "killpen" (this was Unadilla sale in NY), I can tell you that 80% of the horses in that pen looked quite fit and sound. It just broke my heart to look into their eyes... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I also find that an interesting point about the AQHA having just read their public statement about horse slaughter in The Horse magazine recently...kind of puts you in mind of a puppy mill when you realize how many QH are registered each year. They called slaughter a "viable humane euthanasia option..." in their statement. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif No way...not after watching those videos.

Someone else commented earlier about the drugs and chemicals in the horsemeat and how can anyone in Europe imagine eating those horses. I have also wondered that for a long time. For cattle and other animals used for human consumption in the US and that fall under the USDA, there are waiting periods after medications are given before the animal can be slaughtered...no such thing for horses...at least not a realistic one. It just amazes me that it doesn't come up more often as an anti horse slaughter point at least from a human consumption viewpoint.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

onthebit12000

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:30 PM

Moose,asked: Is there anything that can verify that California and Illinois aren't just transporting their unwanted out of state to Texas and Canada?

Reports from California indicate, that there are not many killer buyers present at the auctions these days. The reason being, it is far to much trouble and risk to try to aquire CA horses, when there are so many other states, which leave their horses unprotected from this trade.
As far as Illinois horses go, it is no different than for that of horses from any other state. The overwhelming majority of horses who end up in the slaughter house, were NOT brought there by their owners. The vast majority are aquired at auction by killer buyers paid by the plants to fill their quotas.
In Illinois, we have appx. 220,000 horses(5th largest horse populace in the US) these 220,000 are owned by 77,000 horse owners, which means the average horse owner owns nearly 3 horses.
By the plants own estimations, only 10% of the horses they slaughter come from within the state. For Illinois this represents 1,500 horses a year, as Cavel claims they slaughter 15,000 year. 1,500 hundred horses would only represent 500 horse owners, most of which probably sell at auction without ever knowing where the horse is likely to end up. Only a very small percentage of horse owners, knowingly or willingly lead their horses to slaughter. As for exports to Canada and Mexico, the plants will tell you themselves, that the numbers slaughtered are representative of the overseas demand, not the supply.
The numbers exported to Canada and Mexico have remained constant throughout the last two decades, at appx. 20,000/year to Canada and 1,000/year to Mexico.
You must also, keep in mind the economics for the killer buyers, the longer distances they have to travel the less profit in the trip.

Also, just to mention a side note to the AAEP concerns regarding the export of horses to Canada and Mexico, and their concerns regarding the funding of rescues etc. these issues ARE addressed in the text of H.R. 857. To read the text of the bill please visit:
www.horse-protection.org (http://www.horse-protection.org)
The enforcement procedures for horses crossing the borders for potential slaughter post the ban on horse slaughter already exist. Any border crossing will easily be able to recognize a shipment of horses for sport, vs a double decker or large livestock transport loaded with 40 or more head for what it truly is. It will be totally uneconomical for killer buyers to try to deliver horses to slaughter in Canada at the rate of 10-12 head at a time.
As far as the funding for rescues goes, the bill provides for this as well. Not to mention, think of all the extra funding and resources we will have when we no longer have to try to save horses from slaughter. There will be far more resources to address the abuse and neglect of our horses once horse slaughter is banned.
Banning horse slaughter is a win win proposition for our horses!

onthebit12000

Feb. 8, 2004, 06:32 PM

Equinelaundry,

I would be very interested in your findings regarding the AAEP, please email me privately, should you so choose.

onthebit12000

Feb. 8, 2004, 07:19 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Daydream Believer:
Onthebit,

Did anyone else notice how nice and healthy those horses looked in those videos? I saw some good looking horses....certainly not all crippled ancient horses like folks like to think go to slaughter. So much for that fallacy too. Having been to a "killer" auction once and having looked into the "killpen" (this was Unadilla sale in NY), I can tell you that 80% of the horses in that pen looked quite fit and sound. It just broke my heart to look into their eyes... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

How right you are. We all must remember, that the plants are dealing in "meat" they are not providing a service to horsemen. In fact the plants will tell you, too skinny, too old, we will "dispose" of the horse for a fee(usually $50.00) To let you know their mentality, a sign in one of the plants reads" The best color of a horse is...FAT" The video's and pictures do not lie!! These horses are healthy, shiny, most are shod and some even have freshly pulled manes. Now you tell me, does this sound as if the person who sold the horse was intending for it to end up as "filets" in some European restaurant? There are several pictures on the Mary Nash's website:
www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat/index.htm (http://www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat/index.htm)
of horses awaiting slaughter outside of the Dallas Crown plant in Texas. They are anything but old, skinny and neglected.

You also made a great point regarding the medication issue. As we all well know, horses are not regulated as a food producing species...YET. The new USAIP(ID plan) is seeking to do just that. Regulate horses as a food producing animal. If we do not ban slaughter in the US, it is just a matter of time, before life as we know it in the horse industry will forever be changed. We will lose access to many medications and products that we currently enjoy in our quest to provide our horses with the very best of medical and health care. The inclusion of horses in the food chain to satisfy the appetites of foreign diners, will lead to a ban on many commonly prescribed medications such as "bute", banamine, clenbuterol, and many OTC products such as Furacin and Kopertox just to name a few. We will all be held legally accountable should any horse we own end up as human food and test positive for banned substances. Do we really want the government to tell us how to run the horse industry? To me horses are part of the horse industry, not the "meat" industry.
The UK has just gone through a similar process akin to the USAIP. The UK out of pressure from the European Union to ensure no horses whose meat might be contaminated end up as human food, has just adopted what they call horse passports. All horses must be identified with life numbers through a microchip. The passports state if a horse is intended for food or not. Those intended for food may never in the course of their lifetimes recieve any medications which are banned in food animals, ie. bute, hormones etc.They also, must follow strict withdrawl guidelines on any meds they receive. This sure does limit ones options for treatment if you choose to mark your horse "intended for food". The one good thing with the passports, is that an owner,can at any time change a passport on a horse from
"intended for food", to "not intended for food." Once a horses passport states "not intended for food" it can never be reversed and thus he is prtected from slaughter for human consumption.

Seems like our government could better use the billions and billions of $$'s it will take to implement and enforce this kind of plan in the US. The nerve that they would be willing to spend our tax dollars to accomodate a couple of foreign owned horse slaughter plants. Truly dispicable!
Why dont they spend a little time and money on helping us to improve the multi-billion dollar horse industry, instead of trying to kiss up top the EU??

-Bailey-

Feb. 8, 2004, 07:42 PM

omgomgomg i can't even see it... the words next to it were graphic enough.. i feel sick to my stomach. On the thread of the starving horses with very graphic pictures, i started crying, sobbing, shaking. What makes it ten times worse is that i know that if we hadn't bought my pony, Elijah, that's where he was headed...

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif Love you all-

Founder of Spooky Horses Clique
Appaloosa Clique * Mare TB Clique
Arabian Clique * Paint Clique
http://community.webshots.com/user/baileyjump1118

Character

Feb. 8, 2004, 08:13 PM

So who has the funds to put out an ad in some foreign newspapers? I will design it if someone can do it.

I think they should know what our horses are given...

Also, I think the AAEP's stance on horse slaughter is the most pitiful, wishy washy thing ever! hahaha please. I find it funny that it was taken as a valued source for information with NO FACTS or research to back it up. Where are the people questioning THEIR data? Why? Because the data would prove them wrong. But, they ARE vets...too funny. Not one person addressed that. Where are their facts to back up their statements - seems everyone wants the facts on where anti-slaughter people come from. What about pro-slaughter?

Another thing, and I've looked, but I'm not sure where to look specifically, foreign owned companies get TAX BREAKS for setting up shop here, and hiring american workers. Who has access to these things? Lets take a close look at these corporations. There are also tax breaks for the exportation of agricultural commodities. Which these horses are considered to be in this case. Does someone know where to look for these things?

Albion

Feb. 8, 2004, 09:08 PM

OldLadyOnATB, I wish more people thought like you. Before I got my dog, my family had only ever owned purebreds - Bostons, Cairns, and Westies. We purchased ALL of them from REPUTABLE breeders (the sorts that interview a prospective family multiple times before even THINKING about selling you a puppy!) - all of our dogs have come from people who genuinely cared about the animals they were bringing into this world, even if some of them wound up only being pet quality. One of our Bostons got too big & his ears never stood up; our Westie would be show quality, but she has a pink nose (oops!); and our Cairn, who was as wonderful as the day is long, if a bit 'on' at times, came from lines bred for terrier trials & probably could've done well.

All of our house pets are spayed and neutered. I have neither the desire, the money, nor the knowledge to breed dogs - I am quite happy having animals that I enjoy as companions and pets, not as little breeding machines. The cat that my roomie rescued when we moved into my current house was unspayed & pregnant when we got her - we kept two kittens, two went to her parents, and one went to her boyfriend. I can't imagine people being so careless as to want to go through that multiple times in a year. I get VERY angry when I see people breeding dogs 'to make money' or for other, more sinister reasons (dog fighting comes to mind) - my friend rescued her pitbull from the side of a road in Appamattox, VA, where she had been dumped with a litter of puppies (none of the puppies survived). It was pretty obvious that even though she was young, she had been used as a breeding machine - while being skinny as a rail. It's the sort of stuff that makes my blood boil. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Humans are irresponsible. I wish we could change it, but I don't think that without a wholesale cultural paradigm shift it's going to happen.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

onthebit12000

Feb. 8, 2004, 09:17 PM

Character,
Our group has sent press releases all over Europe and Asia, detailing the the export of tainted US horsemeat for human consumption. We are in contact with someone from the Belgium media, and are working on getting this exposed.
I have the data and facts in the press release, and we can reissue it at any time.
The EU already knows that a problem exists with the lack of regulation of horsemeat in the US.
The demand for US horsemeat has drastically decreased over the last decade due to consumer awareness of the unsafe nature of this as food. The EU has banned the import of horsemeat in years past due to outbreaks of trichinosis traced back to US horsemeat plants.
In 2002 the EU was inches away from banning the import of US horsemeat,due to the medications issues and the drastic percentage of drug residue overages in the meat, but in "closed door" negotiations with the USDA, they agreed not to implement the ban!! Wonder how much that one cost us taxpayers???? Unbelievable, what a dispicable, vile trade this is!!
People can and do die from eating contaminated food and foods laced with drugs and chemicals.
I guess if our government has no value for human life, how can we expect them to value equine life?
The one major thing we all can do is get involved!! We all need to contact our congressman and demand that they support and co-sponsor H.R. 857. We need to take control over the fate of our horses. We obviously cannot leave it up to the government or the vets to save them from the greed of the foreign plant owners.

Daydream Believer

Feb. 9, 2004, 04:42 AM

I remember the big stink about 5 years or so ago when they banned bute in Europe. There was a black market demand for it and it drove the costs up here in the US. I think it would be terrible if we were no longer able to give our horses certain medications just so somebody down the road could safely eat our horse!

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

All points

Feb. 9, 2004, 06:47 AM

Our Philadelphia news station NBC 10 is doing a report on Equine Slaughter and New Holland, tomorrow night at 11:00 P.M. They have been running small clips since the weekend. I plan to watch it. I'm sure after the report airs they will post the clip on their website.

Daydream Believer

Feb. 9, 2004, 07:07 AM

I highly recommend reading that paper on that link Onthebit provided called "Slaughter, An Unnecessary Evil" Very well written and full of facts. I'm now a convert to this new bill to ban slaughter.

Incidentally, on Page 47, a killer dealer mentioned called Arlow Kiehl is the very man I bought my mustang pony out from under...the rescue I mentioned earlier. He was due to pick him up in 3 days and I got there first. He has been arrested 9 times for illegal transport of horses to slaughter as well as animal cruelty. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

onthebit12000

Feb. 9, 2004, 08:56 AM

You can read a lot more about Arlow Kiehl and his cronies at www.equineprotectionnetwork.com (http://www.equineprotectionnetwork.com)

I am so glad that you read the TRF's white paper, it soundly dispels all the pro-slaughter myths. It is what compelled me to get involved!!

I wanted to let you all know that I will be unable to post here for a couple of days.
I am headed, momemtarily to Springfield IL to meet with Illinois legislators and our lobbyists regarding SB 1921. I will be there two days.

I didn't want you all to think I dropped in out of nowhere, only to vanish just as quickly!!

I pray, that all of you who stand in support of ending this horrible tragedy, will PLEASE take action!! Every single phone call or fax or email to a legislator is registered as a vote in favor of a bill!! Together we can end this nightmare. Please visit:
www.horse-protection.org (http://www.horse-protection.org) for a list of both the US Congressman and the Illinois state legislators.

Figure

Feb. 9, 2004, 09:36 AM

I think it is "BARBARIC" what is being done and the GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE NEEDING TO GET THEIR FINGTERS OUT THEIR ASSES AND START WAKING UP .. I wonder if they would like their childrens ponies going that way .. They should show it to their children and families and let them know what they are allowing to do instead of stopping it .. That would shake them up .. And their families .. I tell you what I would do to these people dealing in this way .. SHOOT THE BASTARDS .. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Feb. 9, 2004, 10:12 AM

I don't have time right now to respond to the things that I would like to respond to, but I just want to say this:

The video posted here is horrific, whenever it was, wherever it was, how it happened. But you don't have to look very far in the threads here on Off Course to see another example of the OTHER way many other horses will probably go if there is no alternative (and this is very likely if federal funding for rescue groups is not provided).

Take a look at Reggie.
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/,s,6656094911,a,ga,ul,312607941,ic,Y/Reggie_front.jpg

I'd LOVE for ALL of the horses and ponies like Reggie to be lucky enough to find a forever home where he is loved and fed and cared for. But if this bill gets passed AS IS, not only are all the horses like Reggie probably not going to find such a home, but these horses aren't going to have any alternative other than to starve to death.

This is a horribly emotional debate. NO ONE wants to see these horses die, no matter how they go. This is not pro-slaughter vs. anti-slaughter. Both sides are fighting for what they think is best for the horse, in light of the desperate situation we face with tens of thousands of unwanted horses per year.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Two Toofs

Feb. 9, 2004, 10:54 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:
. But you don't have to look very far in the threads here on Off Course to see another example of the OTHER way many other horses will probably go if there is no alternative (and this is very likely if federal funding for rescue groups is not provided).

Take a look at Reggie.
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/,s,6656094911,a,ga,ul,312607941,ic,Y/Reggie_front.jpg

I'd LOVE for ALL of the horses and ponies like Reggie to be lucky enough to find a forever home where he is loved and fed and cared for. But if this bill gets passed _AS IS_, not only are all the horses like Reggie probably not going to find such a home, but these horses aren't going to have any alternative other than to starve to death.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "other alternative" is available right now. How did it help to keep Reggie from suffering?

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

Feb. 9, 2004, 11:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:

The "other alternative" is available right now. How did it help to keep Reggie from suffering?

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obviously, in this case Reggie was lucky enough to find a home. But if he WASN'T lucky, wouldn't you rather his suffering end quickly rather than die a long, painful death. This is not an ideal situation, but it is reality.

Do you really think the retirement and rescue groups can absorb the cost of all of these unwanted horses that will come from banning slaughter? IF the bill included provisions for providing the millions in funds needed for their care PLUS prevented transportation across borders, it would be one thing. But it does NOT include these things. So, you have starving, neglected horses that cannot ALL be taken in, without federal funding.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Daydream Believer

Feb. 9, 2004, 11:28 AM

kt,

Please read that article that ONTHEBIT referenced about The Unnecessary Evil. Here's the link again http://www.trfinc.org/ scroll down and you'll see the title. I think you will realize how ridiculous the argument is that we are going to be overrun by unwanted horses if were stop the slaughter of 40,000 a year that we are now being slaughtered in this country. The great decline in the number of horses slaughtered in the 1980's (over 300,000) to the 40,000 today has not resulted in an increase in neglected starving horses so it's not really a smart argument to think that another 40,000 is really going to make much of a difference. The well written article really covers it well.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

Two Toofs

Feb. 9, 2004, 11:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:

Obviously, in this case Reggie was lucky enough to find a home. But if he WASN'T lucky, wouldn't you rather his suffering end quickly rather than die a long, painful death.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

By your argument, he should have never been starved because his owners would have taken him to slaughter instead. Why didn't they? If he hadn't found someone to help him, he would have suffered a long, painful death in a country where slaughter is an option.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

Feb. 9, 2004, 11:40 AM

The video is terrible. Having spoken with someone today who recently saw the process firsthand and up close and knows quite a bit about the process, it appears that the type of incident shown in the video is very rare. Errors occur in all other types of euthanasis--I have heard many horror stories of euthanasia by injection gone wrong, even in the hands of highly qualified vets. Should we ban ALL euthanasia then?

I don't understand the vet-bashing. I really don't. Especially by equinelaundry, who seems to know the top AAEP so well that she can say they have "turned off" their emotions and haven't worked in a crisis setting.... Do you know the AAEP president supports equine adoption facilities by providing free care, or care for just the cost of medications? I'm just baffled as to how you can assume these things.

And just simple misinformation. Onethebit, you are 100% wrong that the AAEP has never polled its membership on its welfare views. In fact, they have, and 88% of the membership would like slaughter to be available as an option if necessary. Because you have completely gotten this wrong, why should I believe that any other facts you state are credible?

Character, how is the AAEP statement wishy-washy? All that the AAEP is concerned about is the welfare of the horse. THEY ARE NOT PRO-SLAUGHTER. In an ideal world, horses would all have homes and be taken care of. But that is not the case, so the AVMA/AAEP strives to make any process involving the horse as humane as possible. What data are you looking for? Did you notice the facts about how much money it costs for basic care for one horse per year? I think the strongest information comes from several extremely knowledge, compassionate and experienced horsepeople/vets watching the process and affirming it is humane. Obviously, if you have a chip on your shoulder about vets as you appear to, that is not credible enough.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Feb. 9, 2004, 11:50 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:

By your argument, he should have never been starved because his owners would have taken him to slaughter instead. Why didn't they? If he hadn't found someone to help him, he would have suffered a long, painful death in a country where slaughter is an option.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I really don't know the answer to that question: why did they allow him to starve instead of having him destroyed? There's a thousand possibilities to that question, but no matter the answer, yes, it'd be a shame if he died a long, painful death when his owners had an option to end it for him quickly. In those instances, it does not matter whether slaughter exists or not. But you cannot legislate every single thing. In this current situation where slaughter does exist in our country, what you can do is provide choices and information and help people to make the best decision possible in regards to the horse's quality of life. Obviously, if the option of slaughter is removed, the choice is taken away, so more regulations are needed to ensure that the horse still has a decent quality of life. Currently, the bill does not provide for that.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

moose

Feb. 9, 2004, 12:07 PM

[/QUOTE]The "other alternative" is available right now. How did it help to keep Reggie from suffering?[/QUOTE]

Bottom line, I think they didn't care. I think you will see more of that from idiot breeders that can't unload their stock and are too cheap to make a decision until it reaches a point like Reggies and they know they can't even present the animals to a sale.

You mentioned signs that often said "fat" in the slaughter houses. All types of slaughter houses are under pressure to not accept sickly underweight looking animals. This can also be why you are seeing fatter horses going to slaughter. A horse in any condition like Reggie will likely spend time in a feed lot to improve his condition before he is presented to a slaughter house. Is that better? I honestly don't know. I do think that who ever let him go to that point would probably be callous enough to let him starve to death if he wasn't transported.

I do think that they are more under pressure now because they can be taped or viewed, which is a good thing.

[QUOTE]I think it is "BARBARIC" what is being done and the GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE NEEDING TO GET THEIR FINGTERS OUT THEIR ASSES AND START WAKING UP .. I wonder if they would like their childrens ponies going that way/QUOTE]

Gov't Officials are also elected to make decisions that will benefit the vast majority of their people that don't have "ponies". Ponies and horses are often viewed as hobbies, luxuries. If I'm right, I think you need to show a certain amt of years of profit in breeding and showing to be declared a Business.

I am thinking the average gov't official will see the slaughter industry as a Business with revenue into our own economy, "foreign or not" and the average horse as being a Hobby. This is a problem I can see with any people I am around that aren't horse people. Horses are viewed as a luxury. If the horse industry with it's breeders can't take care of the problem than why are tax dollars expected to take care of the "hobby"?

I am reading http://www.trfinc.org/ and there are many things in it that could sway me. It is possible that once breeders can't unload their stock easily through auctions because the cost of transportation is too great they will slow down, and it is possible that the PMU industry slowing down will have a huge effect as well.

However I have to admit that I think that sometimes anti-slaughter advocates (not all) get so passionate about their cause they mirror tactics from other animal organizations and do not present facts which is why I appreciate knowing where videos and pictures come from and "all" facts surrounding them.

[This message was edited by moose on Feb. 09, 2004 at 03:25 PM.]

equinelaundry

Feb. 9, 2004, 01:51 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kt:
The video is terrible. Having spoken with someone today who recently saw the process firsthand and up close and knows quite a bit about the process, it appears that the type of incident shown in the video is very rare.[QUOTE]

Yay, another opinion.

[QUOTE]I don't understand the vet-bashing. I really don't. Especially by equinelaundry, who seems to know the top AAEP so well that she can say they have "turned off" their emotions and haven't worked in a crisis setting..... [QUOTE]

Take the time to read thru my entire posts and not just pick something out here & there. I bashed government entity's; USDA vets, vets appointed to government positions and some State Vets. Why you insist on harping on AAEP is lost.

I would be more than happy to talk to talk to every single member of AAEP.

[QUOTE]Do you know the AAEP president supports equine adoption facilities by providing free care, or care for just the cost of medications? I'm just baffled as to how you can assume these things..[QUOTE]

Well he should. They were his livelihood and got him to where he is today. if there were more vets that did the same we wouldn't be in this debate.

[QUOTE]Character, how is the AAEP statement wishy-washy? All that the AAEP is concerned about is the welfare of the horse.THEY ARE NOT PRO-SLAUGHTER. In an ideal world, horses would all have homes and be taken care of. But that is not the case, so the AVMA/AAEP strives to make any process involving the horse as humane as possible. What data are you looking for? Did you notice the facts about how much money it costs for basic care for one horse per year? [QUOTE]

Very Good Point. Which is why our society is in this position. Which is why so many animals are euthanized - humane or not. It cost money to maintain these lives. I know of one vet who encourages breeding - more money for lots of ultrasounds, 1x week visits, many lost foals but not after trying to save them and billing thousands of dollars.

[QUOTE] I think the strongest information comes from several extremely knowledge, compassionate and experienced horsepeople/vets watching the process and affirming it is humane. Obviously, if you have a chip on your shoulder about vets as you appear to, that is not credible enough.[QUOTE]

I have an huge chip for vets that breed. Nothing like watching a Pedigree commercial with a "top vet" and "breeder of...". This is sick.

I also have a chip on MY shoulder for vets that allow neglect to continue. If all the members of AAEP are so wonderful how come there are so many horses in rescue. How come so many come in not registering on the body scale? I have a horse that is 17.2 and weighed less than 800# when I rescued him from a very nice show barn. His pelvis was completely turned to one side, you could see every piece of cartlidge and he was on a diet of 8qt. of sweet feed and straight alfalfa. Do you know how many farriers and vets walked by him? Do you know how long it takes to get from a healthy 1500# to 800? I proudly wear my chip on my shoulder for anyone in a professional equine position that does nothing. They have a responsiblity as professionals and yet so few stand up and do something about it. Do they not live by an ethical code? Vets don't go into it for the money - you do it because they love animals right? Of course. Yes, it is the owner that starves the horse but it is the vets, neighbors, boarders, etc. that allow this to happen.

Lots of people are afraid of confrontation. I'm not and would love to sit at a round table with AAEP and discuss a few members, show them pics, let them hear the voice of the horse rescuer and horse lovers. And as you can see from my screen name I am not a troll and I have LOTS to lose from posting on this - like my business - but I've had nothing but support from my clients in what I do. Oh, and I happen to have a wonderful, compassionate & experienced equine vet.

Again, please get off my ass about AAEP. Reread my posts, all of them, then you will again read that I am against slaughter only because it lessens the responsibility of breeders.

How many vets passed by Reggie in his condition? Hmmmm

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

Whiskey Lullaby

Feb. 9, 2004, 01:54 PM

::::barf:::: Yes, it happens, unfortunately it doesn't look like it will come to an end any time soon. With the horses 100%!

And now for a little inspiration... (found this on the net, no idea where)
He was always there...Always patient with you. When you dug in with your heels as you were just learning to ride, when you fell off he wickered gently in concern. When no one else would listen, he was there.
When you went to your first show...remember that? But then he got old. You couldn't ride him anymore. You didn't want a pony anymore. A big warmblood...that's what you want. So you went and sold him. He was sold and sold again. But he's usless now. You unlocked his treasures as you spent years together. No one else will. Everyone else sees and old boney nag.
Do you remember him? He remembers you. Maybe you will remember him when you use your glue again, or feed your dogs. He will be there again...but did you really want that?
Do your part to help stop horse slaughter...no one ever said trying hurt.

Speak kindly to your little horse,
And soothe him when he wheezes,
Or he may turn his back on you,
And kick you where he pleases.

LLDM

Feb. 9, 2004, 02:16 PM

I know this is a tough subject and everyone feels strongly about it. I read the White Paper too. But it was clear to me that no one has the "provable" facts and numbers to back up their arguments. This is a long term problem with no easy answers. My advice is this:

If you just want to "Ban" something, many people will not take you seriously. So, what will you replace it with? Propose reasonable ways to humanly destroy horses that is low or no cost.

Why do you think that vets support this? They see the horses in horrid conditions, suffering beyond their help when they are finally called. You bet they hate that. Even worse than slaughter. And yes, it happens all the time.

Give them (Vets) a way to help, an better avenue to support and they will jump on it. Make it easy for them to report neglect and have a way to rectify the situation and they will do it. Right now they have little or no right to do so.

Support the universal ID#'s and microchips! So you can prove your numbers! Track the sources of horses ending up in plants! Then, go after them directly, with proof.

Educate, educate, educate! Proper care, proper breeding, proper, inexpensive euthenasia and disposal.

By all means, ban slaughter! But face the realities and offer solutions that will replace the need (or perceived need for it).

SCFarm

A Leg at Each Corner

equinelaundry

Feb. 9, 2004, 02:27 PM

OldladyonaTB: I forgot to thank you for your post earlier. I wish every breeder would be as responsible as you and to go as far as spaying and neutering your pet-quality dogs, taking them back, well.....you get the biggest gold star ever http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif. You are a breath of fresh air!! Thank YOU!!

LLDM: Same goes for you. Education is the key to all this. Thank you for restating that.

Kristie
______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

DMK

Feb. 9, 2004, 02:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by YoungFilly:
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I had thought that the bolt gun was supposed to be less cruel than a bullet. Obviously not.

People, the world is cruel. Thats just the way it is. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A little off topic from the question of slaughter, but there are certainly more than one vet who thinks that when properly done, either bolt gun or bullet is just as humane if not more humane than euthanasia.

The difference is that bolt/bullet renders the animal instantaneously brain dead, then other body functions such as respiration and circulation cease. Whereas with euthanasia, the heart shuts down first and brain death follows in several minutes.

We really don't know which is less painful as there isn't a lot of experimenting going on, but most people agree that brain death is most likely to be the least painful way to go.

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." - Kierkegaard

Feb. 9, 2004, 07:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:

Take the time to read thru my entire posts and not just pick something out here & there. I bashed government entity's; USDA vets, vets appointed to government positions and some State Vets. Why you insist on harping on AAEP is lost.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The reason I am "on your ass" about the AAEP is I made a statement how the top people (as in Executive Committee) visited the plant and affirmed the process was humane, and then you replied back with comments about lunch meetings with the big boys and turning off emotions and other comments that made me bristle. I took it as an attack against those vets and thought it was truly unfair. So fine, I'll drop that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I also have a chip on MY shoulder for vets that allow neglect to continue. If all the members of AAEP are so wonderful how come there are so many horses in rescue. How come so many come in not registering on the body scale? how many farriers and vets walked by him?... I proudly wear my chip on my shoulder for anyone in a professional equine position that does nothing. They have a responsiblity as professionals and yet so few stand up and do something about it. Do they not live by an ethical code? Vets don't go into it for the money - you do it because they love animals right? Of course. Yes, it is the owner that starves the horse but it is the vets, neighbors, boarders, etc. that allow this to happen. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand the beef that you have with certain vets, but like you say I don't think vets are personally and solely responsible for these tragic neglect cases. I can't tell you how many owners I've come across who simply wouldn't provide the care the vet has told them the horse needed, whether it's laziness or stupidity or whatever. I've seen some neglected horses who have never even been SEEN by a vet, ever. We are ALL responsible, as boarders, animal lovers, even as human beings, to report this kind of stuff. As someone else mentioned, there aren't a whole lot of avenues in place at this time for vets to speak out. And I have often heard of vets (or just people, myself included) seeing a clear neglect case and not being able to activate any kind of rescue efforts or intervention due to uncooperation with officals.

It's complicated and emotional. I am sorry for going on about vets and the AAEP and the AVMA. Yes, there are bad vets. But please don't paint them with a wide brush. Don't make them a scapegoat. The entire system of equine welfare/slaughter/neglect is in need of a giant overhaul, but the burden does not rest on one party's shoulders entirely.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

equinelaundry

Feb. 9, 2004, 07:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:
I understand the beef that you have with certain vets, but like you say I don't think vets are personally and solely responsible for these tragic neglect cases. I can't tell you how many owners I've come across who simply wouldn't provide the care the vet has told them the horse needed, whether it's laziness or stupidity or whatever. I've seen some neglected horses who have never even been SEEN by a vet, ever. We are ALL responsible, as boarders, animal lovers, even as human beings, to report this kind of stuff. As someone else mentioned, there aren't a whole lot of avenues in place at this time for vets to speak out. And I have often heard of vets (or just people, myself included) seeing a clear neglect case and not being able to activate any kind of rescue efforts or intervention due to uncooperation with officals.

It's complicated and emotional. I am sorry for going on about vets and the AAEP and the AVMA. Yes, there are bad vets. But please don't paint them with a wide brush. Don't make them a scapegoat. The entire system of equine welfare/slaughter/neglect is in need of a giant overhaul, but the burden does not rest on one party's shoulders entirely.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

Yippeee!!! Thanks for the second chance!

Oh, I so know that this is not a vet's responsibility BUT, it is my sincere hope that if more could come forward, without retribution from collegues or anyone else, it would be a step.

First and formost is controlling the breeding. That comes with education and more people like oldladyonaTB. She's what the breeding world needs more of. People who will take responsibility from birth to death. Anything else seems NQR!

I am truly working on a network (could always use help http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif!) consisting of caring, compassionate equine vets and farriers where the only interest is the equine - not the feelings of the owner. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

OldLadyOnATB

Feb. 9, 2004, 08:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:

First and formost is controlling the breeding. That comes with education and more people like oldladyonaTB. She's what the breeding world needs more of. People who will take responsibility from birth to death. Anything else seems NQR!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the endorsement. Your words are kind. But in my opinion, it is apriviledge to be able to take care of these animals. I see it NO other way which is why I find the whole issue of neglect and abuse of any animal so unforgiveable.

There is an alternative to slaughter houses....that would be to recognize when your horse has no more quality of life....you pick up the phone and call your vet....and he comes over and euthanizes your beloved pet while you kiss him goodbye. That is the only alternative for me.

If I had EVER wanted to make money off my hobbies, I would NOT have started breeding dogs (there is NO way you can do it right and MAKE money) and I am certainly not going to attempt it with horses!

This debate is useful, informative and important. More importantly....thanks to OnTheBit for taking time to do something about it.

Elizabeth

After all these years, I have gotten back into horses. God has blessed me and Heaven help me!

Albion

Feb. 9, 2004, 08:19 PM

Going back to my earlier example, though, how in the world are we supposed to educate people on the responsibility that goes along with breeding animals if we can't even educate humans on the responsibility that goes along with bringing a human child into this world?

My current SO has a precious 3 year old daughter - his ex girlfriend thought having a kid would, you know, make everything ok, produce the requisite ring, house with a white picket fence, and Golden Retriever. It didn't. That's irresponsibly creating another life to me. Now, before anyone jumps on me, yes, I realize it takes two, but there were (and still are) extenuating circumstances in that case - essentially, though, the above is what it all boiled down to. She didn't decide to have a child because it was the right time in her life & could support said baby, she had a child for other reasons (much like many people breed animals willy-nilly 'to make a profit', without thinking of the long term consequences and ramifications of their actions for the animals themselves). Many HUMANS don't want to take responsibility for their own actions & can't think of the long term consequences for bringing into this world & raising a child, much less when they see potential dollar signs involved (as in horses or dogs), no matter how misguided they may be.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

silver

Feb. 10, 2004, 03:32 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Do you know the AAEP president supports equine adoption facilities by providing free care, or care for just the cost of medications? I'm just baffled as to how you can assume these things..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well he should. They were his livelihood and got him to where he is today. _if there were more vets that did the same we wouldn't be in this debate._ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
what is that supposed to mean! Vets make their livings from rescue centers? I hardly think so, most of the ones I know are more than happy to donate time. The truth is that equine vets work long hours all week to make a lving and I don't think anyone is in a position to claim that they are somehow "responsible" for abusive owners.

By your reasoning if doctors would just give people free medical care there would be no more child abuse. Right.......

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
I have an huge chip for vets that breed. Nothing like watching a Pedigree commercial with a "top vet" and "breeder of...". This is sick. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What vets aren't allowed to breed? The most knowledgable people who can breed most economically, many of whom are lifelong horsepeople? But ti's somehow more irresponsible for THEM to breed than other people? That's irrational.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I also have a chip on MY shoulder for vets that allow neglect to continue. If all the members of AAEP are so wonderful how come there are so many horses in rescue. How come so many come in not registering on the body scale? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Again, how exactly is the AAEP supposed to stamp out horse abuse? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Lots of people are afraid of confrontation. I'm not and would love to sit at a round table with AAEP and discuss a few members, show them pics, let them hear the voice of the horse rescuer and horse lovers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, I'm guessing that you might learn a lot.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Again, please get off my ass about AAEP. Reread my posts, all of them, then you will again read that <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But it's OK for you to bash them? Publicly? As someone who is involved in horse rescue?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I am against slaughter only because it lessens the responsibility of breeders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No it lessens the responsibility of OWNERS. All this bashing the breeder is nonsense, they breed the horse and sell it in good faith. At that point it is the responsibility of the CURRENT OWNER to maintain the horse's condition. Blaming the breeders is the easy way out.

This kind of rant is the reason why many people, myself included, are not more involved in organized horse rescue/slaughter issues. I'm sorry if that insults those who are (and I'm sure you'll let me know about it). But honestly, do you expect vets, owners or breeders to read this and go "She's right! Lets send her organization some money!"

DMK

Feb. 10, 2004, 06:41 AM

equinelaundry

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:02 AM

Good God Silver - since you are throwing insults I'll bite, against my better judgement. You should hit print and read the whole thread, all posts, word for word, so you can keep up with everyone. You are a little behind in the times and again, are one of those people who just pick out a sentence or 2 and start blowing your horn.

Just when you think nothing can surprise you anymore I read your post.

Your comments about a vet being able to "breed more economically" are just mind-boggling.
OMG http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif So as long as you breed economically it's OK? OMG. Well, ya left me speechless on that one. Surely this was said before the first cup of coffee.

[QUOTE]She's right! Lets send her organization some money!" [QUOTE]

What???? Where you got this is only known to you. I have no organization except a laundry business. What you can send me is your old blankets so I can donate them to rescues http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif. I'll wash them, repair them, waterproof them & UPS them, all at my expense, to foward on to a rescue of your choice.

The only "help" I am asking for is for each state to have a group-from vets, farriers, chiro maybe, to volunteer to be available to donate their expertise and not be afraid to speak up. It's to help them do their job properly without having to worry about anything except the horse.

Vets need to feel safe enough and not have not worry about pissing off an owner, pissing off a collegue and be able to help in any way they can without fear. The vets(like anyone else) can only feel comfortable speaking their mind about a neglect or abuse situation if they have other professionals willing to stand up for the case also. I do not expect a vet to give up his whole career to save one horse (although he'd be my hero!). But I want him to feel safe in stating his opinion without retribution.

Again, this is NOT about bashing vets. Vets DID NOT become vets to get rich. They did it because they love animals. Practicing vets have to deal with suffering every day. As in the medical field with obvious malpractice....it is hard to stand up and speak out against a collegue....the stakes are quite high. **Notice I said "practicing vets" not a vet appointed to a position.

And yes, I do, in my rose-colored world, think EVERYBODY should give back - maybe even watch "Pay if Forward" occasionally to reinforce.

Again, this is a village effort that must start at the bottom.

There are a lot of rescuer's that have not posted on this and with the point getting lost in all this mess I can understand this.

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

CrossedWings

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:15 AM

I asked before but nobody seemed to see my question so here it is again:

Will eliminating horse slaughter stop or significantly lessen the amount of horse killing (by other means deemed inappropriate methods of killing by "us.")?

Quote for the week:

"Never under-estimate the power of stupid people in large numbers." - Shirt Slogan

Daydream Believer

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:30 AM

Guess that depends on what you consider to be inappropriate. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I think it's a joke to call horse slaughter euthanasia...mercy killing. Like let's send our beloved old horses to the slaughterhouse to stand in the blood and offal of other dead horses, in sight of horse carcasses, with noise and strange surroundings and some guy is bolting them to death and it takes 3-4 times to kill the horse? Yeh, that's merciful all right. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

If slaughter is ended than yes, more folks will have to take responsibility as horse owners to put down a horse they can't sell or give away. If it costs them a few hundred $$$ than that's a cost of owning horses. Too bad. Don't own a horse if you can't afford to have it destroyed and hauled away or buried. JMO.

If you read that paper we have given links to you will know that there is little real basis for the argument that eliminating horse slaughter in this country will greatly increase horse abuse. Over 350,000 horses were slaughtered in the US in the 1980's which is down to about 40,000 now. There has been no increase in abuse with that great of a drop so why would anyone think a mere 40,000 more horses would make such a huge difference?

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

FairWeather

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:35 AM

kt, you missed Toof's point.
You said that horses will suffer because slaughter would not be available.
Toof's said that even with slaughter being available, it still happens.

CrossedWings

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:35 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I am against slaughter only because it lessens the responsibility of breeders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No it lessens the responsibility of OWNERS. All this bashing the breeder is nonsense, they breed the horse and sell it in good faith. At that point it is the responsibility of the CURRENT OWNER to maintain the horse's condition. Blaming the breeders is the easy way out.

This kind of rant is the reason why many people, myself included, are not more involved in organized horse rescue/slaughter issues. I'm sorry if that insults those who are (and I'm sure you'll let me know about it). But honestly, do you expect vets, owners or breeders to read this and go "She's right! Lets send her organization some money!"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you Silver and well stated! I am in complete agreement that the OWNER is responsible. Taking your little box of stickers with a red circle and a line crossed through it and placing it on the heads of all "breeders" is a little presumptuous. There is no single "interest" group other than some "horse owners" responsible for these problems. It's on the back of the individual owner; some people do the slaughter route; others go for the starvation and neglect route, and the rest are just good owners! I find it so interesting that people point to ALL the breeders and say "they breed horses so it's their fault," automatically assuming that every breeder produces less than stellar animals unfit to do much more than stand as pasture ornaments. There are plenty of responsible breeders out there that have top of the line horses and I can guarantee you that those breeders do not stand in the same line as the local neighbor that decides to breed his/her psychotic mare to a two-time generation in-bred stallion from down the road so they can "have a baby." These are two very different "breeders." How can you coat "breeders" as being responsible and then look at breeding farms like Iron Spring, Dark Horse (Alla Czar), Craighead (All The Gold), and Tish Quirks farm (Just The Best).......

Really......

Dancing Lawn

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:37 AM

I've seen horses killed in a few different ways-slaughtered with a bolt gun, shot in the head, and euthanized, by a vet. And you know what? I still have nightmares about the first two. With a vet, it's done quietly, usually at home, in a loving surrounding, that isn't traumatizing to a horse. If you truly have horses because you love them, it's the only way to do it. No horse of mine will ever be sent for slaughter, or shot in the head. If the vet bill means I don't eat for a week, that's fine. At least I'll be able to sleep.

less hard work, more fine dining.
www.dancinglawnhorses.com (http://www.dancinglawnhorses.com) updated Dec. 29/03

If guys can do it, how hard can it be?

Rocky

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:44 AM

Bravo Dancing Lawn....

My new barn mantra...has changed to when the h@!! is it going to warm up?

Feb. 10, 2004, 07:48 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by FairWeather:
kt, you missed Toof's point.
You said that horses will suffer because slaughter would not be available.
Toof's said that even with slaughter being available, it still happens.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I don't think I missed the point at all. I replied that it is pretty much impossible legislate certain things, like compassion and common sense and good decisions. What you can do is provide a choice and information to help them make a decision. No, equine slaughter does not equal a worldwide end to suffering horses. No one said that. But it does provide an alternative, and obviously many horses DO go that route, instead of suffering. Like I also stated, if the option of slaughter is removed, the choice is taken away, so more regulations are needed to ensure that the horse who previously would have gone to slaughter still has a decent quality of life (meaning, federal funding of rescue groups). Currently, the bill does not provide for that, among other things.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

equinelaundry

Feb. 10, 2004, 08:22 AM

Crossed Wings, if you are referring to me I did not say ALL breeders.

Everyone is entitled to their views however it's disturbing that a few posters will go to their grave passing the buck. So quick we are to throw stones. Hope you don't live in a glass house.

For those who are continuing to picking thru my posts for something else please note: I find it fascinating to note what you are quoting me on saying.

As far as the big breeders - Contucci is a beautiful stallion but not every one will follow in father's footsteps. It was just a year or so ago that the public bashing was for one brilliant stallion - seems a couple mare owners weren't happy and blamed some problems on the stud. Improving the breed is one thing but having 1000's of babies on the ground is another. I could undertand if someone could tell me WHY this is necessary. Because we can?? We gotta come up with something better than that.

Overbreeding-as long as it is available then mare owners thru-out the land are going to fulfill their dream and create the "perfect horse" right in there own backyard. Yes, I know - it is the mare owner who is buying the sperm. We could go round and round on this folks.

Bottom line is there are MORE irresponsible breeders than responsible - horses, dogs, cats, rabbits, just every domesticated animal. Uh, this goes for humans also.

As with a child you are supposed to be responsible for that child for life. Again, we have proven to fail at that also. But, who failed? Depends on who you talk to. Every person is going to blame another - human nature to not want to take responsibility for our actions. How is the heck is anything going to change if owners, breeders, vets, rescuers cannot communicate with each other. To take responsibility somehow has turned into a blame game. Not a good sign of where we are headed http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif.

I do NOT to have any affiliation with animal rights groups, extremists, etc. I'm just a gal with an opinion.

Oops, there I am thinking of a better world again. Shame on me. BTW, my degree is in social work!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

[This message was edited by equinelaundry on Feb. 10, 2004 at 11:32 AM.]

Feb. 10, 2004, 08:52 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by equinelaundry:

For those who are continuing to picking thru my posts for something else _please note:_ I find it fascinating to note what you are quoting me on saying.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if I'm going to make any sense or not, but let me try to explain where at least I am coming from when I zero in on certain specific statements in any post (I am not referring just to your posts, this is not an attack):

When you post a statement or belief in a post, you do not post it in a vacuum. Meaning, every statement you make is tied to all of your other statements, when it comes to how someone perceives it. It's part of your argument, and it's the context for everything you say. So even if you say just a couple of things that gets under someone's skin (no matter who is in the wrong or right), it affects how they see you, your point of view, and your argument. Every single thing you say either helps or harms your credibility.

In debate such as this, it is perfectly reasonable for people to focus in on aspects of your argument that they disagree with, especially when you have made somewhat generalized references to certain groups (even though you didn't MEAN all vets or all breeders, that is how it has come across initially).

Not trying to stir up anything, just wanted to give my input on why I think posters do this.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

equinelaundry

Feb. 10, 2004, 09:16 AM

Very well put KT!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif
Hope there are no hard feelings. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Kristie

______________________________
**If you don't rescue, don't breed. Simple solution to companion animal overpopulation.**

Nikki^

Feb. 10, 2004, 02:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Albion:
Going back to my earlier example, though, how in the world are we supposed to educate people on the responsibility that goes along with breeding animals if we can't even educate humans on the responsibility that goes along with bringing a human child into this world?

My current SO has a precious 3 year old daughter - his ex girlfriend thought having a kid would, you know, make everything ok, produce the requisite ring, house with a white picket fence, and Golden Retriever. It didn't. That's irresponsibly creating another life to me. Now, before anyone jumps on me, yes, I realize it takes two, but there were (and still are) extenuating circumstances in that case - essentially, though, the above is what it all boiled down to. She didn't decide to have a child because it was the right time in her life & could support said baby, she had a child for other reasons (much like many people breed animals willy-nilly 'to make a profit', without thinking of the long term consequences and ramifications of their actions for the animals themselves). Many HUMANS don't want to take responsibility for their own actions & can't think of the long term consequences _for bringing into this world & raising a child_, much less when they see potential dollar signs involved (as in horses or dogs), no matter how misguided they may be.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I feel for you girl! I really hate those who think having a baby will make everything go alright or that it will being attention to them. What a sick and twisted thing you SO's ex did to him. And then they go on welfare and we tax payers have to pay for everything.

But on the Horse Slaughter video. Ya, it's sad but it's better than them starving in a paddock to death (or a stall...er.. Melinda Stone!)
Look at how cows, pigs, goats, chickens are processed! Look at how Veal is made. MY cousin had a dairy farm and he said that he hated the veal part.
Hmmm....How about we slaughter the murders that are lifers in our prison? Me thinks Charlie Manson need to be made into dog food.

OK, but seriously, every part of the horse is used right? The mane, tail, coat, hooves, blood, organs etc. People do eat horse meat and since Mad cow and the Bird Flu came into light, well then the demand for horse meat will rise. I'm sorry, but if you want to band horse slaughter, then ban cow, chickens, goats, pigs and the rest.
Stop eating meat, using leather and all sorts of thing made from animals.

How about Human Population control so there won't be such a huge demand of meat? I got an idea:

You will get 30k cash and tax free from the Government if you get your tubes ties(male or female). But you have to sign a waver that you will not sue the Government if you decide later down the road to have kids. You cannot have kids of your own or adopt, period. And here's the bonus, if you are married and you both get "fixed" that's 60K tax free cash! Hey, sign me up!

Kioko (http://www.geocities.com/area51/crater/5267/HeartofGold.html)

Look up your TB's bloodlines (http://www.dmtc.com/dmtc98/Pedigree/)

Albion

Feb. 10, 2004, 03:07 PM

Thankfully, mama isn't on welfare - although she does reap the tax benefits of having a kid. My SO is a dutiful child support payer, every month - on time, and if his ex needs money for X, she gets it. There are some definite sick & twisted parts of her tactics, but that's life. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif My SO loves his baby to death, but can admit that having a child at that particular time probably WASN'T the best idea - but he certainly wasn't gunning for a kid.

I do think education is key in all of this - but I think we need to start with education on human pregnancy first. JMHO.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

relocatedTXjumpr

Feb. 10, 2004, 03:15 PM

I have been staying away from this thread because it is not only heart wrenching to watch the videos, but because of the posts that can occur when people feel very pasionate about a subject.

The videos are disgusting! Plain and simple. I am shaking with fear, anger, and heart ache....I keep thinking of my two babys standing in that line...A place they both were very well headed. My stomach aches with what they would have gone through.

People eat horses in other countries, fine...who am I to say what you can and cant eat. Slaughter them in your own country and with HUMANE ways! A horse is not a cow, as a cow is not a chicken. Cows and chickens are fed VERY well and CARED for before they are sent off to slaughter...I live in a county that got its start from chicken farmsand Tyson is right next to the court house! I see these trucks day in and day out, I pass the farms everyday...the chickens are not starved or beaten. I have family in the cow business. These cows are fed and not beaten. They are not mistreated. What happens to them AT slaughter...I dont know. I do know that what is shown in these videos is not humane...it does not kill the animal instantly...if the killer has to keep shooting it 3 and 4 times...than IT DOESNT WORK well does it?!?! I'm trying to figure out why this is even an issue...this should not even be happening!
They offer leathel injection to killers because its fast,painful, and HUMANE...so this is what we do to an animal that has done NOTHING wrong?!?! That doesnt make ANY sense to me at all!

WE cant save them all, we just cant. But imagine how many we can save if they sTOP doing this! Or how many more souls could go to rest quietly and quickly by them doing this in another HUMANE way!

If you EVER have a chance, and a few extra dollars to spare, to buy one of these WONDERFUL animals, please do. It may only be one, but that one horse will be forever greatful to you! Why not pass up the $30,000 made show jumper to save a life and maybe have one of those rags to riches horses?!?! THINK ABOUT IT!

Now, I must go hug my horses and give them lots of kisses.

Everyone please dothe same!!!

B & B Sport Horses at Second Chance Farms

Member of the Paint Hunter Clique

http://community.webshots.com/user/ga_jumpr
Dont put the cart before the horse, unless he knows how to push it of course. ~~ Pat Green

rosijet

Feb. 10, 2004, 04:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by CrossedWings:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I am against slaughter only because it lessens the responsibility of breeders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No it lessens the responsibility of OWNERS. All this bashing the breeder is nonsense, they breed the horse and sell it in good faith. At that point it is the responsibility of the CURRENT OWNER to maintain the horse's condition. Blaming the breeders is the easy way out.

This kind of rant is the reason why many people, myself included, are not more involved in organized horse rescue/slaughter issues. I'm sorry if that insults those who are (and I'm sure you'll let me know about it). But honestly, do you expect vets, owners or breeders to read this and go "She's right! Lets send her organization some money!"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you Silver and well stated! I am in complete agreement that the OWNER is responsible. Taking your little box of stickers with a red circle and a line crossed through it and placing it on the heads of all "breeders" is a little presumptuous. There is no single "interest" group other than some "horse owners" responsible for these problems. It's on the back of the individual owner; some people do the slaughter route; others go for the starvation and neglect route, and the rest are just good owners! I find it so interesting that people point to ALL the breeders and say "they breed horses so it's their fault," automatically assuming that every breeder produces less than stellar animals unfit to do much more than stand as pasture ornaments. There are plenty of responsible breeders out there that have top of the line horses and I can guarantee you that those breeders do not stand in the same line as the local neighbor that decides to breed his/her psychotic mare to a two-time generation in-bred stallion from down the road so they can "have a baby." These are two very different "breeders." How can you coat "breeders" as being responsible and then look at breeding farms like Iron Spring, Dark Horse (Alla Czar), Craighead (All The Gold), and Tish Quirks farm (Just The Best).......

Really......<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Granted, I haven't read every post thoroughly, but I don't remember reading about every breeder being irresponsible and careless. There are MANY good and honorable breeders who seek only to improve the breed and who take responsibility for what they do.

Then there are the others... I work with a rescue group that goes to local feedlots, finds QUALITY, HEALTHY animals and pays a bit over meat prices to save them. Occasionally, an older, less viable one will steal their hearts and they bring 'em home. They do the best they can.

Last fall, they took a trip up there (I can't go, too much of a weenie). In the yearling and younger pen were 40 babies. 20 or so were weanlings that came from a QH breeder who breeds anything with a uterus, keeps the best, and ships the rest to the killers.

My own newest rescue was a home bred quarter horse. The owners decided to liquidate the few horses they had and took the easy way out - local auction frequented by killers. I contacted the original owner to get Jett's story. She had NO idea that the guy who bought him was a killer. Needless to say, I gently educated her and told her Jett will have a loving home with us. This horse has NOTHING wrong with him. He's beautiful. Every knowledgable horse person who has met him shakes their head in disbelief that he was off to slaughter.

The rescue works very hard to find out the history on their cases. The stories are incredible. Disposable pets. Inconvenient animals. One horse, estimated to be worth $50,000 by his previous trainer, was sent away because he misbehaved at a show. The trainer had no idea the owners did this. She was told he was sold to a nice, new home. That boy now has a wonderful life with a girl who could never afford a horse like that on the open market.

There are days when I want to hide under the covers and pretend these horrors don't exist. But they do. And I'll do my part, however I can, whether that be rescue, education or fighting those who think slaughter, as it currently is performed, is OK.

Those of you that are unsure how you feel about the slaughter issue - go do some volunteer work at a local rescue. Get educated. That should help you take a position.

Sorry for the long post. This is a subject that will always be contentious, and I usually stay away from those types of topics. This time, I just couldn't...the hopeless, broken souls that we see weighed too heavily on my heart.

"Crazy is just another point of view" Sonia Dada

DMK

Feb. 10, 2004, 04:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by dancing lawn:
I've seen horses killed in a few different ways-slaughtered with a bolt gun, shot in the head, and euthanized, by a vet. And you know what? I still have nightmares about the first two. With a vet, it's done quietly, usually at home, in a loving surrounding, that isn't traumatizing to a horse. If you truly have horses because you love them, it's the only way to do it. No horse of mine will ever be sent for slaughter, or shot in the head. If the vet bill means I don't eat for a week, that's fine. At least I'll be able to sleep.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, I have seen the same thing. And I've seen all three methods go well and not go well. When it doesn't go well, it's not pretty.

But if you have seen a horse shot at home versus euthanized, what exactly about it gave you nightmares? Truly, this is an honest question.

For me, personally, I do find the act of shooting a horse more disturbing than watching death by barbituate, but I put that down to cultural influence.

When you see a horse euthanized it is easier to equate that with sleeping (as evidenced by the phrase "putting him to sleep"). Meanwhile a gunshot evokes all the cultural meaning of violence, unintended death and so forth. Not to mention the animal drops like a rock rather than folding down.

But if you truly look at the physical process of death, can you make a case that instant brain death is worse for the animal than what ultimately amounts to a much slower more drawn out death by suffocation and organ failure, followed by brain death? (The process of "euthanasia" is described as follows: "When properly administered by the intravenous route, barbiturate overdose (60-80 mg/kg sodium pentobarbitol IV) produces rapid unconsciousness and anesthesia followed by respiratory depression, hypoxia, and cardiac arrest.")

Now I freely admit to being a hypocrite. I have had to put down two animals in the last few years, and even though I feel that euthanasia via bullet is truly less painful (based on everything we know about the process of death) than euthanasia by barbituate, I selfishly put my own feelings ahead and opted for barbituates.

And honestly, I think we might be splitting hairs as to which is most humane, so I can live with that.

But I still have a hard time understanding why anyone thinks euthanasia by bullet (or penetrating captive bolt) is less humane than by barbituate. Unless of course the humanity we are talking about is our own cultural perceptions.

Note - talking about the process is a different argument than talking about the place.

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." - Kierkegaard

Calico

Feb. 10, 2004, 05:12 PM

I agree with you in philosophy, DMK. Shooting is instantaneous, and humane. However, I'd also argue the key ingredient in euthanasia by barbituates is "rapid unconsciousness." EEG scans have shown that *usually* unconsciousness occurs before everything shuts down.

DMK

Feb. 10, 2004, 05:16 PM

I totally agree with you moonkitty.

But it still leaves us in a place where shooting can't be less humane, and the vast unknown as to exactly what a living being is experiencing between unconsciousness and brain death. And I don't think we are going to solve that one any time soon, so it's pretty much off the table. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." - Kierkegaard

Daydream Believer

Feb. 10, 2004, 05:19 PM

DMK,

I can tell what that cost you to post...your feelings are really on the line. I have to say though that I don't think the barbituates are more painful than a CORRECTLY applied bolt of well aimed bullet. The horse becomes unconcious before his heart stops. He doesn't know he's dying because he's not aware. I know there are some other euthanasia drugs that do stop the heart first but most people/vets don't believe they are truly humane and do not use them or if they do, they anestatize (sp) the horse first so it is unconcious.

I think a correctly used bolt gun is probably pretty humane but that isn't the real issue here. It's the fact that the slaughter process we all witnessed in those videos was not humane. Those horses did not enjoy a "mercy killing" at all. They did suffer both emotionally and physically. That is just outragious to me that it's LEGAL to do that in this country. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Before watching those videos I had a mental picture of horses being handled with consideration and kindness at least and not being so traumatized. I imagined one well placed bolt to the head...not 3 or 4....much less horses being intentionally hit in the shoulder for whatever sick reason. I know I have read accounts where great efforts have been taken in cattle slaughter to make the process less stressful for the cattle...decreasing noise and disturbing visual stimuli, etc... I believe that is being done more and more. Obviously, that isn't the case with the horses. I just don't think it's right nor do I think it's necessary for horses to be slaughtered in this country. If all the horses going through those plants were old, decrepit, lame, crazy, unwanted horses then fine...maybe it is a place to get rid of them...but those horses are servicable and some even very young and rescued ones go on to have super lives. My own pony that I rescued from that fate is stunning. I've turned down many serious offers for him. He was only 6 when I found him and his only "crime" was being owned by idiots who adopted a mustang for their nine year old and it didn't work out like black beauty or whatever fantasy they imagined. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Sorry I'm just rambling and will shut up now. I too was highly disturbed and had some preconcieved notions shattered by those videos and had my mind changed by the anti slaughter arguments posted here. It's time to end it.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

Coreene

Feb. 10, 2004, 05:39 PM

Random thoughts, in no particular order. I have posted this elsewhere before, so bear with me.

1) Happened in Holland. My cousin's daughter's horse has foundered all 'round overnight. He is in his 20s. They call the butcher to come pick him up, the horse is taken away and slaughtered for human consumption, with the humane killer. I was horrified, my cousin was totally pissed off at my being horrified. But the butcher has a special area for this, the horse didn't see evidence of other horses. Do I think it was a very sad ending for a dear old friend? You betcha, I'd have put him down at home. But then I took a step back and looked at the bigger picture: was it better to put the old guy down than be heroic for an old horse who had foundered in all four feet? For me it was. And many times, when your insured horse in Holland needs to be put down, to get the insured amount it will go to an approved butcher.

2) As for humanely euthanizing a horse, BBer Pinkerdo held her finger against whatever artery at the base of Willem's neck it was that the vet injected the stuff into. Willem was so far into Jerry Garcia Land at this point, (because we HAD to dope him up and get him out of the stall, he was too big to put down inside) that I am sure he was already seeing the beauty of Heaven and preparing himself for the journey.

Sidebar: yes that was a huge big drama nightmare, but there was no choice. The way his stall was positioned, it was impossible to remove his body had we done it in the stall.

But I digress. Vet said "Now," Pinkerdo removed finger, Willem went down at the exact instant she removed her finger. I went straight down as well, held his head the entire time (funny how the brain tries to cushion you from these things; I thought I had gently kneeles and they layed flat, but my knees were black the next day and everyone thought I had fainted).

"Entire time" was not long. He never thrashed, never fought it. Willem was ready to go, he went in a blaze of glory. We had no option, we could only do the medical way.

What mattered to me the most is that he was gone. He asked, we answered. It was a horrid journey to send him on for me, for him it was his final request. Do I wish the meds way was faster? Certainly.

Well, none of this makes any sense except to say that I wish none of it had to happen, but s**t happens and what can you do about it. That cousin and her family are horsey, so no consumption of horsemeat there. My great grandmother thought smoked horsemeat was the greatest thing going. Do I wish it didn't happen? You betcha. But since it does, I wish there was a way they could be more humane in doing the final deed.

BTW, I am all for rescue. Willem was a rescue. And I would certainly rescue one to have it put down, if that would keep it from the slaughterhouse. A friend just asked if I would have a look at a colt that a friend of his adopted ("He saved it from the slaughterhouse.") Sounds like the colt is not going to ever be sound at all.

Edited to take out the S word, my bad.

[This message was edited by Coreene on Feb. 11, 2004 at 02:53 AM.]

OldLadyOnATB

Feb. 10, 2004, 06:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by kt:

But it does provide an alternative, and obviously many horses DO go that route, instead of suffering. Like I also stated, if the option of slaughter is removed, the choice is taken away,
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At the risk of stirring up some more "stuff"....KT would you happen to be on the pro-choice side of the abortion issue? I was only curious and respect your opinion regardless of wether I share the same opinion.

I don't know....it would be an interesting poll....of those that want to ban horse slaughter....do you also consider yourself anti-abortion?

Elizabeth

After all these years, I have gotten back into horses. God has blessed me and Heaven help me!

Albion

Feb. 10, 2004, 06:56 PM

Uh, OldLadyOnATB, at the risk of soundy witchy, I don't think that's a debate that's appropriate to this board. This thread seems to be inflamed as it is - no reason to make it that much worse.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

CrossedWings

Feb. 10, 2004, 10:48 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Daydream Believer:
Guess that depends on what you consider to be inappropriate. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I think it's a joke to call horse slaughter euthanasia...mercy killing. Like let's send our beloved old horses to the slaughterhouse to stand in the blood and offal of other dead horses, in sight of horse carcasses, with noise and strange surroundings and some guy is bolting them to death and it takes 3-4 times to kill the horse? Yeh, that's merciful all right. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

If slaughter is ended than yes, more folks will have to take responsibility as horse owners to put down a horse they can't sell or give away. If it costs them a few hundred $$$ than that's a cost of owning horses. Too bad. Don't own a horse if you can't afford to have it destroyed and hauled away or buried. JMO.

If you read that paper we have given links to you will know that there is little real basis for the argument that eliminating horse slaughter in this country will greatly increase horse abuse. Over 350,000 horses were slaughtered in the US in the 1980's which is down to about 40,000 now. There has been no increase in abuse with that great of a drop so why would anyone think a mere 40,000 more horses would make such a huge difference?

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did I ever say that horse slaughter was euthansia or mercy-killing? No. What I did say is that I DO NOT and WILL NOT EVER send my own horses to slaughter; I wouldn't do that to my horses; the ones I've worked so hard to get and keep.... I also said that I would not be responsible for the elimination of horse slaughter; I feel there is a time and place for everything, but I DO draw the line at a bolt missing 3-4x. In my opinion the system needs it's kinks worked; (e.x - proper restraint of the horse so that the chance of missing the first time is less than 1%).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>If slaughter is ended than yes, more folks will have to take responsibility as horse owners to put down a horse they can't sell or give away <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But will they take responsibility? It's unlikely. I agree that it is the owners responsibility to plunk down the money and humanely euthanise their horses when they take on the job of horse ownership but the reality is that some horse owners are ignorant and don't really care about the welfare of their animals! That's why we find animals left starving to death in broken down barns! While I wouldn't think twice about putting the money down to have the vet come over for mine if the situation arose; I know that to other people... well it's not a matter of the welfare of the horse; in fact some people don't really care, and perhaps that $300 in their pocket is worth it.... It's sad, but banning slaughter will NOT ensure that these owners take responsibility, all it does is ensure the horse doesn't go to slaughter; but abuse, neglect, starvation or attempts to kill their own horses are still options....

40 000 horses is not alot in comparison to the whole horse population, personally I feel that number is a little on the low side, but, assuming that the articles cited are accurate I'll work with it. 40 000/year means each year the number of normally slaughtered horses increases by 40 000 more; in order to keep the current horse numbers down (would-be slaughter horses) something needs to be done with 40 000 extra horses/year (many of which are likely to not be suitable for "Careers" or riding; a lot will make good pasture pets). So for each of the 50 states, 800 extra non-descript horses will be available. Assuming that rescues/shelters take all 40 000 (in the U.S.) on; and they cost, say $1000/yr to upkeep; you are looking at $40 000 000/yr expenses + that same amount every extra year in the entire US, or $800 000/yr/state.... If every horse is euthanised by a credible veterinarian, say the cost is $300 (including a short amount of upkeep, euthansia, truck pick up, disposal of body) per horse, you're yearly expenses for destroying all of these animals is $12 000 000/year, or $240 000/year/state.

The financial burden is fairly significant, and while some horse owners (myself not included) are quite eager to put their hard worked money towards these expenses, lots of other horse owners, and non-horse owners are not going to be happy about having their tax dollars go towards funding the euthansia of all of (or at least most of) these horses....

I come back to my original post; if the same number of horses is going to continue to die each year and perhaps more will be neglected/abused/starved (Which is already a problem, but still ads to the existing numbers) has the problem really been solved? If banning slaughter does not eliminate the killing of those same 40 000 horses each year, has it really done anything to stop the problem or has it been something to make you feel good about your honorable intentions?

I know I do not support anti-slaughter, but I do have problems with the system. I think that it needs to be changed and made into a workable system that has the animals welfare at heart. Proper restraining of the animals, quick-clean systems (say a power hose + drain that allows killers to quickly clean up messes left from each horse), use of guns that work well, and properly trained killers.

I would like to know, if, after each horse the blood/mess was immediately cleaned (say a 1-2 minute process), and animals were restrained in a corral like system used for cattle, and killers were trained well enough to have very good accuracy (less than 1% chance of miss), and the horse was basically in, and done in less than a minute or two; would you still have a problem with slaughter?

Flame suit in tact, fully functional, and now operating..... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Feb. 11, 2004, 05:43 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by OldLadyOnATB:
At the risk of stirring up some more "stuff"....KT would you happen to be on the pro-choice side of the abortion issue? I was only curious and respect your opinion regardless of wether I share the same opinion.

I don't know....it would be an interesting poll....of those that want to ban horse slaughter....do you also consider yourself anti-abortion?

Elizabeth

After all these years, I have gotten back into horses. God has blessed me and Heaven help me!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like Albion said, I don't feel this question has any place on this thread. Not only is it two entirely different issues (at least in my opinion), it is a very dangerous can of worms to open in an already emotional topic. So, I'm sorry but no comment-- but no hard feelings either. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Daydream Believer

Feb. 11, 2004, 07:05 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by CrossedWings:

40 000 horses is not alot in comparison to the whole horse population, personally I feel that number is a little on the low side, but, assuming that the articles cited are accurate I'll work with it. 40 000/year means each year the number of normally slaughtered horses increases by 40 000 more; in order to keep the current horse numbers down (would-be slaughter horses) something needs to be done with 40 000 extra horses/year (many of which are likely to not be suitable for "Careers" or riding; a lot will make good pasture pets). So for each of the 50 states, 800 extra non-descript horses will be available. Assuming that rescues/shelters take all 40 000 (in the U.S.) on; and they cost, say $1000/yr to upkeep; you are looking at $40 000 000/yr expenses + that same amount every extra year in the entire US, or $800 000/yr/state.... If every horse is euthanised by a credible veterinarian, say the cost is $300 (including a short amount of upkeep, euthansia, truck pick up, disposal of body) per horse, you're yearly expenses for destroying all of these animals is $12 000 000/year, or $240 000/year/state.

I disagree with this logic. It doesn't mean they will increase exponentally with 40,000 more each year but rather the supply of horses will eventually balance to demand...just economic principles. Breeders will not continue to breed so many horses if they cannot sell them or at least drop off their culls at a slaughterhouse somewhere...not that many do that now anyway...mostly PMU farms anyway and hopefully that industry is in decline as well. The industry will balance itself if slaughter is ended.

I would like to know, if, after each horse the blood/mess was immediately cleaned (say a 1-2 minute process), and animals were restrained in a corral like system used for cattle, and killers were trained well enough to have very good accuracy (less than 1% chance of miss), and the horse was basically in, and done in less than a minute or two; would you still have a problem with slaughter?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd have a lot less problem with slaughter if it could be done humanely. The problem is it isn't and it's unlikely unless the laws change dramatically that it ever will be. Money talks and the more horses they can run through in one day, the more money they make...thus the less time they will take per horse. They are already supposed to be restraining horses heads and aren't. What makes you think they will take the time to clean up the mess between killing each horse and go slowly and considerately? It would be nice if slaughter continues to see them "clean it up" and make it humane, but I doubt they will unless the laws get tougher.

"No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle..." Winston Churchill

Rock&Gus

Feb. 11, 2004, 07:22 AM

Who here has heard of and read the work of Temple Gradin...she is an autistic savant who has designed approx. 1 third of the slaughter houses in the US...slaughter houses that are reputed to be humane, circular in layout and the cattle don't see the cattle ahead of them, something to catch and hold the heads still, don't know if horses are slaughtered at any of these slaughter houses or not, suspect not due to the size difference of horses and cattle...
Who here has written, called their federal reps to voice their views on the issue of horse slaughter, especially recently when there was a bill before the house on this subject??
Venting on this board is a good thing, for us, but it doesn't do much for the horses, put your views out there for your elected officials to do something with...if enough people keep pushing they will be obligated to do something about it...the wheels of beauracracy are exceedingly, painfully slow, but they do turn if you keep applying pressure.
Just a thought, everybody.

rosijet

Feb. 11, 2004, 08:20 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rock&Gus:
Who here has written, called their federal reps to voice their views on the issue of horse slaughter, especially recently when there was a bill before the house on this subject??
Venting on this board is a good thing, for us, but it doesn't do much for the horses, put your views out there for your elected officials to do something with...if enough people keep pushing they will be obligated to do something about it...the wheels of beauracracy are exceedingly, painfully slow, but they do turn if you keep applying pressure.
Just a thought, everybody.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amen Rock&Gus! I wrote to my rep about the issue and received a reply. If you're passionate about the issue - get involved!

"Crazy is just another point of view" Sonia Dada

onthebit12000

Feb. 11, 2004, 09:28 AM

Here here!!! Everyone, please DO get involved!!

For easy access to your US congressmen, go to:
www.congress.org (http://www.congress.org) Please ask them to support and co-sponsor H.R. 857!!

In Illinois, please go to :www.legis.state.il.us/ Please, ask your representative and senator to support and co-sponsor SB 1921!! together we can and will make a difference!!

SunshineGA

Feb. 11, 2004, 09:52 AM

Just a thought- but does anyone know **WHEN** those videos were taken?

The horses heads were not properly restrained and the AVMA says its best to have the head restrained... but when was this practice considered a requirement? And when were the videos taken?

A lot of radicals for any cause will put up information from before certain laws were put in place jsut to prove their point. If you read almost any animal experimentation article (just as an example) all the sources will be from before 1996 and the laws that seriously restrict and monitor the uses of animals in research weren't in affect until 1996.

So before you guys get all wound up about these specific shots from ONE slaughter house think about WHEN the shots were taken and WHEN laws/requirements were put into place.

Disclaimer- I'm not for slaughter at all but I know to take these kinds of things (videos off the internet with NO date from an animal rights page) with a grain of salt.

Flame suit on...

"When life gives you limes, make margaritas!" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Member of the IHSA clique

http://community.webshots.com/user/sunshinengcsu

Two Toofs

Feb. 11, 2004, 09:56 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by SunshineGA:

The horses heads were not properly restrained and the AVMA says its best to have the head restrained... but when was this practice considered a requirement?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The slaughter plants won't even pretend that they currently restrain the horses heads. The lack of restraint is not something that even they - today, now - will deny.

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

Feb. 11, 2004, 11:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by SunshineGA:
Just a thought- but does anyone know **WHEN** those videos were taken?

The horses heads were not properly restrained and the AVMA says its best to have the head restrained... but when was this practice considered a requirement? And when were the videos taken?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am almost positive the term is "adequate restraint," and I couldn't find anywhere in AVMA documents only there they had specifically referred to the head needing to be restrained to meet the "adequate" standard. It seems fairly vague. Has anyone else been able to find anything on this? I would like to know for my own interest.

What I did find was a 1993 report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia, in which toward the end they list a chart explaining all the aspects of different forms of euthanasia. To use the "penetrating captive bolt" method, the report says that skill, adequate restraint and proper placement of captive bolt are required. Here's the link: http://www.upstate.edu/dlar/avmaeuth.htm

Is it possible that the "adequate restraint" just means the restraint of the body accomplished through the confining nature of the boxed-in chute? The person I talked with who has seen this process first-hand said the heads were NOT restrained. However, the worker was very skilled and trained, and in the many horses that this person saw euthanized, the worker never missed, not even close. Do errors (such as the poor mare shown in the video) happen? Unfortunately, I am sure they do. I would be very interested in knowing the percentage of errors/mistakes like this ocurring when using captive bolt, especially as compared to how often a euthanasia by injection goes wrong.

***
The hardest to learn was the least complicated.

Snowbird

Feb. 11, 2004, 11:16 AM

If you feel strongly that the methods at the Slaughter Houses need to be better suprvised and monitored then notify your Representative of the Horse Caucus in the House of Representatives.US House Horse Caucus contact information (http://www.hunterjumper.org/Horse%20Caucus.htm)

Battle Scarred Veteran

SunshineGA

Feb. 11, 2004, 11:47 AM

Two Toofs and kt-

Thanks, I was just under the impression from other posts that it was either a recommendation or requirement to have the head properly restrained.

Would explain more nut I gtg ride http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (which is more important than explaining/asking questions as of now... but not more important than fighting horse slaughter methods!)

"When life gives you limes, make margaritas!" http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Member of the IHSA clique

http://community.webshots.com/user/sunshinengcsu

Feb. 11, 2004, 06:38 PM

I haven't read every page of this thread, so maybe someone already brought this up - has anyone looked into cruelty charges against individual workers? I didn't watch the video, but it sounds like it was abusive, and should be prosecutable. Unless businesses are exempt.

Also, how hard would it be to hang video cameras in the plants? Even the fake kind from the dollar store might keep the more sadistic workers in line, and it would be a good political move for the plants.

Albion

Feb. 11, 2004, 07:55 PM

A lot of slaughterhouse workers are illegal aliens working for nothing - dunno about horse slaughter places, but that's the case in most bovine slaughterhouses (or so I have read in numerous sources). Good luck charging them. Frankly, their jobs (from what I have read) sound hard enough, dangerous enough, and miserable enough that I wouldn't want to go after illegal immigrants who are just trying to keep their job. I'd go after the owners and operators of the plants - they're the ones that should be brought up on cruelty charges, both human AND equine or bovine.

I don't think the plants care about making good political moves. They care about making money, no matter what the human or animal toll is.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

Feb. 12, 2004, 09:02 PM

But the individual workers who are "trying to keep their jobs" would then have an incentive to do it humanely. The owners and operators would be more likely to regulate their workers' actions if they were having a hard time keeping the plants staffed due to charges being brought whenever there was a violation.

And I do think that if Cavel and whatever other corporations are out there thought that some video cameras would get legions of horse owners off their politicians' backs, they sure would care.

Albion

Feb. 12, 2004, 09:19 PM

AW, they WON'T have a hard time keeping plants staffed - there are ALWAYS more illegal immigrants looking for a job, no matter how crappy/dangerous/badly paying it is. Going after the little guy isn't going to make the big guy care. It isn't skilled labor, it is dangerous, they do try to speed up the lines as much as possible, they don't care about safety - why would they care about an illegal alien here or there being deported on animal cruelty charges, when there are 3 more ready to take his place? The workers DON'T have an incentive to do it humanely - they have an incentive to keep things moving & going fast (thus generating more profit) - and unless you start at the top, that's not going to change. Correct me if I'm wrong, but attempts to reform slaughterhouses (if you ask me, it's inhumane for HUMANS to have to work in such conditions) have been met with miserable failure.

You have to hit the OWNERS and OPERATORS where it hurts. They have plenty of politicians backing them - and the money to back up that support.

'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

Dancing Lawn

Feb. 13, 2004, 05:19 AM

Moonkitty: Have you ever SEEN a horse shot?
I have had several horses and ponies euthanized over the years. When you rescue as many as I do, in a year, you always have some that need to be put down. HUMANELY. And shooting them, is not the way to go. There's no comparison. I have never had a horse have problems when the vet comes and does a professional job. It's quiet, and painless.
Shooting them is a completley different method. It isn't quiet, it isn't painless, and it isn't instantaneous. It's ugly, it's painful, and it can take way too long. It won't be happening on my farm. Ever. If I ever got so cheap that I couldn't pay the vet, then I would have to get out of the business. Because from what I've experienced, that's what it comes down to. People who are to cheap to call the vet, will get the guy with gun. It's hideous, and they should be shot themselves.

less hard work, more fine dining.
www.dancinglawnhorses.com (http://www.dancinglawnhorses.com) updated Dec. 29/03

If guys can do it, how hard can it be?

Two Toofs

Feb. 13, 2004, 05:33 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Albion:
Going after the little guy isn't going to make the big guy care. It isn't skilled labor, it is dangerous, they do try to speed up the lines as much as possible, they don't care about safety - why would they care about an illegal alien here or there being deported on animal cruelty charges, when there are 3 more ready to take his place? The workers DON'T have an incentive to do it humanely - they have an incentive to keep things moving & going fast (thus generating more profit) - and unless you start at the top, that's not going to change. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, to understand we have established that....

1) We have dropped slaughter numbers by far more, sometimes double, the amount we would drop them per year if we ended slaughter now. There has been no noticable effect on neglect/cruelty issues during this time.

2) The meat is tainted with all sorts of drugs.

3) The process is not humane, nor is there any incentive to make it humane.

4) The overwhelming majority of horse owners state that they would "never allow this to happen" to their horse. Those who do admit to the practice are vilified in most circles.

5) The plants do not accept animals that otherwise need to be humanely euthanized - thin, old, crippled. (In the case of crippled, at least they don't do so legally - it is illegal to transport a lame horse to slaughter).

6) The product is one that is illegal to sell for human consumption in most places in this country, specifically in the state where it currently is allowed and in the state where it is being proposed to return.

7) The businesses knowingly break the law and feel they are above it.

8) These are foreign owned businesses and the money reaped from the process does not stay within the US.

9) Pet food companies have even quit using horsemeat - one of the reasons being that they feel that, because of the medication issues, that the meat is not safe for your dog or or cat.

Can someone again remind me again - why it is we should allow this to continue?

Is just that difficult, that we -as members of the horse industry- cannot manage to control our own and see to it that horses that are unwanted or should not be allowed to suffer a poor quality of life come to a humane end when laws are already in place that favor this?

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

horsesrlife65

Feb. 13, 2004, 02:50 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Two Toofs:

6) The product is one that is illegal to sell for human consumption in most places in this country, specifically in the state where it currently is allowed and in the state where it is being proposed to return.

9) Pet food companies have even quit using horsemeat - one of the reasons being that they feel that, because of the medication issues, that the meat is not safe for your dog or or cat.

(Ok, so I am admittedly naive about the slaughter industry, so please pardon the potenialy stupid question) ... then why is it again that horses are being killed? Where/what is the market that creates the demand for it?

Two Toofs

Feb. 13, 2004, 04:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by horsesrlife65:

(Ok, so I am admittedly naive about the slaughter industry, so please pardon the potenialy stupid question) ... then why is it again that horses are being killed? Where/what is the market that creates the demand for it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The meat is being sold overseas where there is a market for it for human consumption. Unfortunately, the US doesn't see fit to see that the meat being sent overseas is free of medications & chemicals that are not to be used in animals intended for human consumption (bute, etc.)

Two Toofs
(formerly - but still - NDANO)

horsesrlife65

Feb. 13, 2004, 05:51 PM

That's what I assumed, and am now officially disgusted.

So now the pending question is no longer simply how do we improve the living conditions of these animals, but how do we end the slaughtering of horses entirely?

But, seeing as it's basically impossible to end human consumption of a product, I'm thinking the chances of that looking pretty bleak ...

Nevertheless, I propose that we all do what we can to asist as many horses in need as we can. Donate your time, talents, and/or financial aid to horse rescue facilities - or (if you are able to afford it) go to an auction and save a horse from a "killer buyer".

I wish there was more to be done, but I (not being the most inovative of people) don't see another plausible action to be taken at the moment.

Does anyone?

DMK

Feb. 13, 2004, 06:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by dancing lawn:
Have you ever SEEN a horse shot?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Shooting them is a completley different method. It isn't quiet, it isn't painless, and it isn't instantaneous. It's ugly, it's painful, and it can take way too long. It won't be happening on my farm. Ever. If I ever got so cheap that I couldn't pay the vet, then I would have to get out of the business. Because from what I've experienced, that's what it comes down to. People who are to cheap to call the vet, will get the guy with gun. It's hideous, and they should be shot themselves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suggest that a gunshot could NEVER be quiet, and I don't know that it would take a rocket scientist to ascertain that. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Perhaps you should take time to observe someone doing it properly before conferring a death wish on all those people as well (I will neglect to mention your good wishes to a friend who had someone shoot her mortally injured animal rather than make it suffer longer while waiting for a vet to arrive). http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I've been present at both, and I can't find ANY medical justification for a properly done bullet to be less humane than euthanasia. What's your reasoning?

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid." - Kierkegaard