Assaulting our rights to own and use horses:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JGHIRETIRE

I'm not sure how you can actually believe that - we've gone out of our way to kill so many animals.
Protect our resources??? Every time I turn around we've cut down another tree or bulldozed another farm all in the name of progress.
The family farm is virtually gone - we are force fed alot of GMO products. Better?? WOW

.

---

I agree. A perfect example of how industry is trying to do things cheaply, and without animal welfare in mind, is when they were trying to write the Humane transport laws. Big Ag wanted no limits put on transport times, food/water being offered prior to transport, etc. They fought every single reg, and ended up with a watered down law that isn't even enforced.
I mean, look at the number of violations where horses at auctions don't have food/water or medical treatment (chavez auction, comes to mind), where they don't get food prior to shipping (recent AA investigation report), where horses go down, and are not unloaded and given vet care (Baker lawsuit, Animal Angels investigation).
It's been proven over and over that Big Ag (or most any large industry really) will put profits above animal welfare. If that weren't so, then there would be no need for laws like HPA, Humane Transport act, etc.
And the poster that said we need ARA to balance things out, in a symbiotic relationship, was correct. That's why I don't really believe that there will ever bee a loss of animal ownership/horses/etc. You have 2 extremes, One wanting profit with no regards to animal welfare and one wanting to make animals have the same rights as people. Eventually you meet somewhere in the middle.

I also have an issue with the ag gag laws. I do understand that they do not want a bunch of nut jobs showing up at the plant but they need to have some sort of check on them.
I believe almost anyone that has absolutely no one looking over their shoulder will do something wrong - that's what checks and balances are for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetsmom

I agree. A perfect example of how industry is trying to do things cheaply, and without animal welfare in mind, is when they were trying to write the Humane transport laws. Big Ag wanted no limits put on transport times, food/water being offered prior to transport, etc. They fought every single reg, and ended up with a watered down law that isn't even enforced.
I mean, look at the number of violations where horses at auctions don't have food/water or medical treatment (chavez auction, comes to mind), where they don't get food prior to shipping (recent AA investigation report), where horses go down, and are not unloaded and given vet care (Baker lawsuit, Animal Angels investigation).
It's been proven over and over that Big Ag (or most any large industry really) will put profits above animal welfare. If that weren't so, then there would be no need for laws like HPA, Humane Transport act, etc.
And the poster that said we need ARA to balance things out, in a symbiotic relationship, was correct. That's why I don't really believe that there will ever bee a loss of animal ownership/horses/etc. You have 2 extremes, One wanting profit with no regards to animal welfare and one wanting to make animals have the same rights as people. Eventually you meet somewhere in the middle.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetsmom

I agree. A perfect example of how industry is trying to do things cheaply, and without animal welfare in mind, is when they were trying to write the Humane transport laws. Big Ag wanted no limits put on transport times, food/water being offered prior to transport, etc. They fought every single reg, and ended up with a watered down law that isn't even enforced.
I mean, look at the number of violations where horses at auctions don't have food/water or medical treatment (chavez auction, comes to mind), where they don't get food prior to shipping (recent AA investigation report), where horses go down, and are not unloaded and given vet care (Baker lawsuit, Animal Angels investigation).
It's been proven over and over that Big Ag (or most any large industry really) will put profits above animal welfare. If that weren't so, then there would be no need for laws like HPA, Humane Transport act, etc.
And the poster that said we need ARA to balance things out, in a symbiotic relationship, was correct. That's why I don't really believe that there will ever bee a loss of animal ownership/horses/etc. You have 2 extremes, One wanting profit with no regards to animal welfare and one wanting to make animals have the same rights as people. Eventually you meet somewhere in the middle.

---

Nonsense.
That is what you think, because that is what animal rights extremists keep saying.

Nonsense because there are many studies about how to haul animals and what is best and why, for decades now and more every day.

No one in business taking care of their animals want them any other way than taken care the best we can do so.

There are trade-offs with moving animals quickly to their destination, or stressing them more by unnecessary stops.
The longer those animals are in transit, up to a point already well determined by many studies, the more apt they will be to become sick from the trip, something no one wants.

Tell me, why would anyone making a living by caring for their animals so they are producing for them would abuse them and so cut their own profit doing that, not even addressing that those caring for animals are generally extremely caring people, that is why they were attracted to that kind of work and life?

Now, don't bring the trite and tired "but there are abusers out there, no one can deny that".:no:
No one is denying that, that is what we make laws and regulations for, that is why there are inspections and supervision and training.

The problem here, animal rights extremists and their defenders can't see but the abuse here and there, ignore the many, many that do what is right.

Why?

Because they don't care about any use of animals, to them all being abuse in itself.
There we part ways, the ones that care for and use animals and those that want any use eliminated, using the abuse card.:(


This thread is not here to rehash animal rights extremists agendas, but HOW they go about furthering their goals of eventually eliminating all animal use.
Read the OP article and be ashamed to defend such groups as some do here.:dead:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

Nonsense.
That is what you think, because that is what animal rights extremists keep saying.

---

That's not what they are saying, that's what IS happening.
I don't need to listen to what RARA's are claiming, I have witnessed it in person for over a decade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

Nonsense because there are many studies about how to haul animals and what is best and why, for decades now and more every day.

---

And what difference does that make when none of those are entered into legislation, and if they are, there is absolutely NO enforcement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

No one in business taking care of their animals want them any other way than taken care the best we can do so.
There are trade-offs with moving animals quickly to their destination, or stressing them more by unnecessary stops.
The longer those animals are in transit, up to a point already well determined by many studies, the more apt they will be to become sick from the trip, something no one wants.

---

I call bull on that one.

Those in the beef business are buying animals at a much higher price.

Those in the horse killing business are buying them at $ 25 a head with thousands more available for their next shipment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

Tell me, why would anyone making a living by caring for their animals so they are producing for them would abuse them and so cut their own profit doing that, not even addressing that those caring for animals are generally extremely caring people, that is why they were attracted to that kind of work and life?

---

Horse kill buyers are not 'producing' the animals. Sheesh.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

Now, don't bring the trite and tired "but there are abusers out there, no one can deny that".:no:
No one is denying that, that is what we make laws and regulations for, that is why there are inspections and supervision and training.

---

I don't know how you can even claim that to be the case.
Total Fail on that front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

The problem here, animal rights extremists and their defenders can't see but the abuse here and there, ignore the many, many that do what is right.

---

We got it Bluye: Ignore and condone the abuse that happens every day in the slaughter pipeline because otherwise it would threaten your rights. :sigh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluey

Nonsense.
That is what you think, because that is what animal rights extremists keep saying.

Nonsense because there are many studies about how to haul animals and what is best and why, for decades now and more every day.

No one in business taking care of their animals want them any other way than taken care the best we can do so.

There are trade-offs with moving animals quickly to their destination, or stressing them more by unnecessary stops.
The longer those animals are in transit, up to a point already well determined by many studies, the more apt they will be to become sick from the trip, something no one wants.

Tell me, why would anyone making a living by caring for their animals so they are producing for them would abuse them and so cut their own profit doing that, not even addressing that those caring for animals are generally extremely caring people, that is why they were attracted to that kind of work and life?

Now, don't bring the trite and tired "but there are abusers out there, no one can deny that".:no:
No one is denying that, that is what we make laws and regulations for, that is why there are inspections and supervision and training.

The problem here, animal rights extremists and their defenders can't see but the abuse here and there, ignore the many, many that do what is right.

Why?

Because they don't care about any use of animals, to them all being abuse in itself.
There we part ways, the ones that care for and use animals and those that want any use eliminated, using the abuse card.:(


This thread is not here to rehash animal rights extremists agendas, but HOW they go about furthering their goals of eventually eliminating all animal use.
Read the OP article and be ashamed to defend such groups as some do here.:dead:

---

Bluey, I am giving you an open invitation to come down here and attend one of our monthly auctions where many of the horses go to slaughter. You can watch how the horses are handled and loaded. Then we can go to Socorro to the holding facility where you can see the lack of food, water and shelter, and see them load again, and we can go sit at the border and watch them wait to cross. You can stay with me or I'll pay for your hotel rm.
This is the auction where I watched them put an elderly blind mare in with a bunch of other horses in a pen about 30x20. Approx 10 horses in there, with one hay rack. She got kicked numerous times. Then I watched about 35 purebred QH long weanlings get herded into a trailer, and watched the last weanling get the gate slammed on his hind leg and latched, because there wasn't room for him to step all the way in. I also watched two stallions get put in with a mixed sex group of horses in a pen about 100'x60. The two stallions started fighting, much like you see in the "Stallion fighting" Youtube videos. They were rearing/striking until one fell backwards and the other went after it when down. It got up and went down again. It was horrifying, and the killer buyers just watched.
You can also watch the video from Animal Angels, and read the report linked on the slaughter thread, about the 2 horses going down in the trailer, and one got trampled to death, while the authorities did nothing, and the driver raced across the border and continued on his way, rather than unload the horses as required. Animal Angels had no way of knowing what day to go watch , it was random. This IS standard operating procedure. Not an anomaly. Your family farmer/rancher who names his livestock, and was there when they were born, probably DOES care about their welfare. The large factory farms, and those in the horse slaughter business care about money, not animal welfare. If they lose a couple during transport, it is just the cost of doing business to them.

I'm going to pop my head back in here to give y'all some food for thought.

I'm part of an initiative to create a local food system where I live. This initiative involves many people and agencies; I'm just a teeny cog in a wheel.

Chances are similar efforts are happening where you live.

There are many reasons for these initiatives. To protect open space, to enhance animal welfare, to keep revenue in a locality, to satisfy consumer demand for niche products, to keep farming profitable by cutting out middlemen, to help protect cultural and historical assets, all kinds of reasons.

Over 80% of the nations cattle are processed at FOUR slaughterhouses in the US. FOUR.

The rest are processed over our borders, or at one of the very small or small processing plants that are rapidly disappearing from rural areas.

The disappearance of this crucial component of infrastructure contributes to animal welfare problems.

Farmers and ranchers do care about animal welfare. They do.

Most of you live within a few minutes drive of a grocery store.

Most slaughterhouses are many miles away from where the animal is raised.

To get that cut of meat to the store - that animal has to travel perhaps thousands of miles.

The person who raised that animal isn't the one making the real money. That cut of meat in the store may cost as much as 17$ per pound (depending on the cut)

The farmer or rancher is getting 1-2$ per pound - because there is no longer any way to get that product directly to the consumer. The processing facilities are gone - everything is consolidated.

In a local food system, the consumer obtains his meat (and produce but I'm focusing on meat right now) from a producer within 400 miles of his home. (I'm using the USDA definition of "local")

An example might be a person who purchases beef from a farm where I live. That animal might travel 10-20 miles to a local plant - where only a few animals are processed a day. No stress. No co-mingling. No deprivation. No long distance wearying travel.

From birth till death - that animal might travel 10-20 miles. Until its death - it lives on a farm eating grass or grass and grain until it's loaded up for the plant.

Here's the irony.

We need more plants. The feds know this, the states know this, farmers know it - everyone involved in agribusiness KNOWS we need more plants.

But when one is proposed - the very same consumers farmers are trying to reach OPPOSE the plant. Even if it's a state of the art, Temple Grandin approved small or very small plant.

Doesn't matter. They oppose it. They won't know a blessed thing about agriculture or slaughter, but they'll click on a few AR videos and freak out.

In my work, that is the most appalling and disturbing thing I've encountered. The ignorance and knee jerk reactions based on AR lies and propaganda.

So... no plant opens and animals continue to go to one of those four plants. Meanwhile, more and more small plants close.

That's a real world real time on the ground perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSwan

I'm going to pop my head back in here to give y'all some food for thought.

I'm part of an initiative to create a local food system where I live. This initiative involves many people and agencies; I'm just a teeny cog in a wheel.

Chances are similar efforts are happening where you live.

There are many reasons for these initiatives. To protect open space, to enhance animal welfare, to keep revenue in a locality, to satisfy consumer demand for niche products, to keep farming profitable by cutting out middlemen, to help protect cultural and historical assets, all kinds of reasons.

Over 80% of the nations cattle are processed at FOUR slaughterhouses in the US. FOUR.

The rest are processed over our borders, or at one of the very small or small processing plants that are rapidly disappearing from rural areas.

The disappearance of this crucial component of infrastructure contributes to animal welfare problems.

Farmers and ranchers do care about animal welfare. They do.

Most of you live within a few minutes drive of a grocery store.

Most slaughterhouses are many miles away from where the animal is raised.

To get that cut of meat to the store - that animal has to travel perhaps thousands of miles.

The person who raised that animal isn't the one making the real money. That cut of meat in the store may cost as much as 17$ per pound (depending on the cut)

The farmer or rancher is getting 1-2$ per pound - because there is no longer any way to get that product directly to the consumer. The processing facilities are gone - everything is consolidated.

In a local food system, the consumer obtains his meat (and produce but I'm focusing on meat right now) from a producer within 400 miles of his home. (I'm using the USDA definition of "local")

An example might be a person who purchases beef from a farm where I live. That animal might travel 10-20 miles to a local plant - where only a few animals are processed a day. No stress. No co-mingling. No deprivation. No long distance wearying travel.

From birth till death - that animal might travel 10-20 miles. Until its death - it lives on a farm eating grass or grass and grain until it's loaded up for the plant.

Here's the irony.

We need more plants. The feds know this, the states know this, farmers know it - everyone involved in agribusiness KNOWS we need more plants.

But when one is proposed - the very same consumers farmers are trying to reach OPPOSE the plant. Even if it's a state of the art, Temple Grandin approved small or very small plant.

Doesn't matter. They oppose it. They won't know a blessed thing about agriculture or slaughter, but they'll click on a few AR videos and freak out.

In my work, that is the most appalling and disturbing thing I've encountered. The ignorance and knee jerk reactions based on AR lies and propaganda.

So... no plant opens and animals continue to go to one of those four plants. Meanwhile, more and more small plants close.

That's a real world real time on the ground perspective.

---

I agree. But the owners of those large processing plants are also not going to encourage competition. Plus, the USDA is underfunded, and doesn't have enough inspectors now, much less if there were to be processing plants in each state, much less in each city. It's the huge companies and federal regs that have put the small mom and pop ranches out of business, just like Monsanto is doing to farmers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSwan

I'm going to pop my head back in here to give y'all some food for thought.

I'm part of an initiative to create a local food system where I live. This initiative involves many people and agencies; I'm just a teeny cog in a wheel.

Chances are similar efforts are happening where you live.

There are many reasons for these initiatives. To protect open space, to enhance animal welfare, to keep revenue in a locality, to satisfy consumer demand for niche products, to keep farming profitable by cutting out middlemen, to help protect cultural and historical assets, all kinds of reasons.

Over 80% of the nations cattle are processed at FOUR slaughterhouses in the US. FOUR.

The rest are processed over our borders, or at one of the very small or small processing plants that are rapidly disappearing from rural areas.

The disappearance of this crucial component of infrastructure contributes to animal welfare problems.

Farmers and ranchers do care about animal welfare. They do.

Most of you live within a few minutes drive of a grocery store.

Most slaughterhouses are many miles away from where the animal is raised.

To get that cut of meat to the store - that animal has to travel perhaps thousands of miles.

The person who raised that animal isn't the one making the real money. That cut of meat in the store may cost as much as 17$ per pound (depending on the cut)

The farmer or rancher is getting 1-2$ per pound - because there is no longer any way to get that product directly to the consumer. The processing facilities are gone - everything is consolidated.

In a local food system, the consumer obtains his meat (and produce but I'm focusing on meat right now) from a producer within 400 miles of his home. (I'm using the USDA definition of "local")

An example might be a person who purchases beef from a farm where I live. That animal might travel 10-20 miles to a local plant - where only a few animals are processed a day. No stress. No co-mingling. No deprivation. No long distance wearying travel.

From birth till death - that animal might travel 10-20 miles. Until its death - it lives on a farm eating grass or grass and grain until it's loaded up for the plant.

Here's the irony.

We need more plants. The feds know this, the states know this, farmers know it - everyone involved in agribusiness KNOWS we need more plants.

But when one is proposed - the very same consumers farmers are trying to reach OPPOSE the plant. Even if it's a state of the art, Temple Grandin approved small or very small plant.

Doesn't matter. They oppose it. They won't know a blessed thing about agriculture or slaughter, but they'll click on a few AR videos and freak out.

In my work, that is the most appalling and disturbing thing I've encountered. The ignorance and knee jerk reactions based on AR lies and propaganda.

So... no plant opens and animals continue to go to one of those four plants. Meanwhile, more and more small plants close.

That's a real world real time on the ground perspective.

---

So, JSwan, I am hoping you will expand a little beyond your local area so that when I finally have a freezer and generator (for the freak October storms that knock out electic for a week) that I will be able to purchase meat from you. I like the idea of pigs that got belly scratches as part of their care.:D

Actually, that's not true.

There are enough inspectors, because under the Federal Meat Inspection Act there are several options for processing plants. A Talmade-Aiken plant, for example. Custom-exempt plants can also legally process livestock, they're inspected by the state.

Then there is the PPIA - for poultry. There are several options available to producers under the PPIA.

I know of several efforts, in my state, to build small plants. One is ongoing but it won't be approved just like the others weren't approved.

Monsanto wasn't responsible.

AR activists were.

People concerned about animal welfare cannot oppose efforts to alleviate suffering, then crow about their moral superiority while chewing on their steak.

The only regulations that small or very small plants have to abide by are the regulations pertaining to the actual slaughter and labeling.

The way activists and "concerned citizens" stop small plants from opening is by parroting what AR groups publish.

I am hearing and seeing this NOW. In meetings with policymakers and other stakeholders. I'm no fan of Monsanto - but you can't pin this on them. Not entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheval convert

So, JSwan, I am hoping you will expand a little beyond your local area so that when I finally have a freezer and generator (for the freak October storms that knock out electic for a week) that I will be able to purchase meat from you. I like the idea of pigs that got belly scratches as part of their care.:D

---

:)

You know what's in that hog pen now? A pregnant Basset Hound!!!

No, I'm not going to eat her. I'm the midwife. :D

She's nearing her time but I let her run around in the empty hog pen when it's warm out- she needs her Vitamin D!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSwan

:)

You know what's in that hog pen now? A pregnant Basset Hound!!!

No, I'm not going to eat her. I'm the midwife. :D

She's nearing her time but I let her run around in the empty hog pen when it's warm out- she needs her Vitamin D!

---

We want pics of the Basset babies when they're born!!!

For those interested in some of the real world issues facing agriculture, here are some links that ARE NOT from animal rights groups.

No inflammatory rhetoric, no hyperbole.

Facts.

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/too...he-local-beef/

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...ort/err97.aspx

I could list hundreds more.

This affects you. Directly. It affects animal welfare, the future of farming and open space, human and animal health, food security. And more. It affects the horse industry. The horse industry needs the open space. We obtain feed from the very same farmers who are often raising livestock.

Animal rights groups are taking it species by species, state by state. If they cannot get something banned outright, they litigate and harass people or industries until they give up.

The current fashion for these groups is to advocate for the "small farmer". It's a smokescreen. When push comes to shove they'll run over a small farmer in a heartbeat. That small family farmer NEEDS agricultural infrastructure in order to keep farming. That includes slaughterhouses. Oppose the slaughter house, even a state of the art small plant - and the farmer disappears.

Which is what they wanted to begin with.

No farms
No food

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSwan

No farms
No food

---

Not true.

We'll always have Soylent Green.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetsmom

We want pics of the Basset babies when they're born!!!

---

I DON'T KNOW NUTHIN' ABOUT BIRTHIN' NO BABIES!!!!!!!!!!!!



(aw come on you knew that was coming.:D)

ROFLMAO!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSwan

I DON'T KNOW NUTHIN' ABOUT BIRTHIN' NO BABIES!!!!!!!!!!!!



(aw come on you knew that was coming.:D)

---

Truer words were never spoken. I did not know cows were an endangered species when I go to said grocery store!!

JSwan:The person who raised that animal isn't the one making the real money. That cut of meat in the store may cost as much as 17$ per pound (depending on the cut)

I totally get it - I've seen both the good and bad videos out there.
As someone that's at least somewhat knowledgeable about where my food comes from I'm aghasted that these people cannot tell the difference between a good death and a bad one.
We had a very small slaughter plant just north of town.
When I moved up here in 1989 it was already closed but the
property sat there for the past 20 years until the firefighters took over the property and made a training center out of it.
There is also a local organic farmer down the hill trying to raise cattle. They don't have a HUGE piece of property and there is no shelter for the cattle. They are properly fed and taken care of but people drive by and see them in the MUD and call animal control on them. Gee it rains up here usually quite a bit - go figure there would be mud!!

JSwan:But when one is proposed - the very same consumers farmers are trying to reach OPPOSE the plant. Even if it's a state of the art, Temple Grandin approved small or very small plant.

Doesn't matter. They oppose it. They won't know a blessed thing about agriculture or slaughter, but they'll click on a few AR videos and freak out.

In my work, that is the most appalling and disturbing thing I've encountered. The ignorance and knee jerk reactions based on AR lies and propaganda.

So... no plant opens and animals continue to go to one of those four plants. Meanwhile, more and more small plants close.

That's a real world real time on the ground perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetsmom

Bluey, I am giving you an open invitation to come down here and attend one of our monthly auctions where many of the horses go to slaughter. You can watch how the horses are handled and loaded. Then we can go to Socorro to the holding facility where you can see the lack of food, water and shelter, and see them load again, and we can go sit at the border and watch them wait to cross. You can stay with me or I'll pay for your hotel rm.
This is the auction where I watched them put an elderly blind mare in with a bunch of other horses in a pen about 30x20. Approx 10 horses in there, with one hay rack. She got kicked numerous times. Then I watched about 35 purebred QH long weanlings get herded into a trailer, and watched the last weanling get the gate slammed on his hind leg and latched, because there wasn't room for him to step all the way in. I also watched two stallions get put in with a mixed sex group of horses in a pen about 100'x60. The two stallions started fighting, much like you see in the "Stallion fighting" Youtube videos. They were rearing/striking until one fell backwards and the other went after it when down. It got up and went down again. It was horrifying, and the killer buyers just watched.
You can also watch the video from Animal Angels, and read the report linked on the slaughter thread, about the 2 horses going down in the trailer, and one got trampled to death, while the authorities did nothing, and the driver raced across the border and continued on his way, rather than unload the horses as required. Animal Angels had no way of knowing what day to go watch , it was random. This IS standard operating procedure. Not an anomaly. Your family farmer/rancher who names his livestock, and was there when they were born, probably DOES care about their welfare. The large factory farms, and those in the horse slaughter business care about money, not animal welfare. If they lose a couple during transport, it is just the cost of doing business to them.

---

There are some who will never treat ANY animal in a correct manner.

Port Clinton, Ohio Humane Society Sandusky County herded yearling colts (4) and put them in with a very aged mare (1) and they slammed them into a four horse trailer. Mare went down and was trampled. Volunteers told to unload the colts OVER HER (trampling over and over and over. NO Vet called until 7 am and a young girl with two adults were told to DRAG HER OUT BY HER TAIL and just let her lay on the cold ground on one of the coldest days of the year. She had a fractured pelvis, leg and a multitude of external injuries and had to lay IN PAIN for over SIX HOURS. (Robin Vess seizure)

8 yearlings herded into a four horse trailer...6 colts and 2 fillies. Slammed and hit with leads and whips until they all squeezed in. A group of mares were chased for over TWO HOURS thru 2 fences (injuries to legs and chests) they were denied water (so they wouldn't founder and were not given any feed for 12 hours so they could be evaluated. The Canterbury seizure conducted by Humane Society of United States, Days End Rescue and QAC County (filmed by a news crew and by a volunteer...lawsuit pending)

The Hollinger Appaloosa Farms. 21 VERY SKINNY stallions and mares aged 6 months to 18 years old herded into ONE TRANSPORT TRUCK...tempterature 108 F and they were hauled without water, stopping etc to the rescue which was almost 3 hours away. Two horses died enroute.Coordinated by local county and local HS


It would appear that when the seizue is illegal OR a lawyer has been contacted, ALL laws regarding livestock are tossed to the wind by these EQUINE RESCUES in order to get the horses moved before they are stopped.

I can cite about 30 cases from May-end of August 2012

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fairfax

There are some who will never treat ANY animal in a correct manner.

Port Clinton, Ohio Humane Society Sandusky County herded yearling colts (4) and put them in with a very aged mare (1) and they slammed them into a four horse trailer. Mare went down and was trampled. Volunteers told to unload the colts OVER HER (trampling over and over and over. NO Vet called until 7 am and a young girl with two adults were told to DRAG HER OUT BY HER TAIL and just let her lay on the cold ground on one of the coldest days of the year. She had a fractured pelvis, leg and a multitude of external injuries and had to lay IN PAIN for over SIX HOURS. (Robin Vess seizure)

8 yearlings herded into a four horse trailer...6 colts and 2 fillies. Slammed and hit with leads and whips until they all squeezed in. A group of mares were chased for over TWO HOURS thru 2 fences (injuries to legs and chests) they were denied water (so they wouldn't founder and were not given any feed for 12 hours so they could be evaluated. The Canterbury seizure conducted by Humane Society of United States, Days End Rescue and QAC County (filmed by a news crew and by a volunteer...lawsuit pending)

The Hollinger Appaloosa Farms. 21 VERY SKINNY stallions and mares aged 6 months to 18 years old herded into ONE TRANSPORT TRUCK...tempterature 108 F and they were hauled without water, stopping etc to the rescue which was almost 3 hours away. Two horses died enroute.Coordinated by local county and local HS


It would appear that when the seizue is illegal OR a lawyer has been contacted, ALL laws regarding livestock are tossed to the wind by these EQUINE RESCUES in order to get the horses moved before they are stopped.

I can cite about 30 cases from May-end of August 2012

---

So how is that any different from the way horses are treated in the slaughter pipeline, except that their trips are 20 hours and more.
And, we are talking 120,000 horses annually who are potentially exposed to that kind of cruel treatment.

For you to pick and choose your battles against the abuse based on whether it's related to a Humane Society/Rescue or the kill buyers just shows us you are made of the same wood as your pro slaughter buddies here on COTH. :rolleyes:

HSUS trotted out THEIR organic pig raiser in Ohio.

They left out the "important part"

3 butterfly cut pork chops....$24.00

Pork Roast...In Safeway is $18.00 his cost $54.00

HSUS did put the prices out to show that people would be willing to pay more for ORGANIC and "tickled pink" pork.

That was last May.

I was just told he filed for bankruptcy