The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 98 of 98
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    15,635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guilherme View Post
    Sadly, yes.

    G.
    Only for some classes of people...others have never had it.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant



  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    John Holland Horses for Habitat...remember Angela when you and your buddies were cheering that ALL slaughter was closed ... gone..kaphoot?

    John Holland went on his website almost demanding DONATTIONS as all of these horses caught in the transport pipeline were going to need new homes

    He wanted 1 MILLION DOLLARS so he could provide immediate refuge for the TEN THOUSAND HORSES HE KNEW were in transport. He wanted the money now.

    He continued to run that on his website and blog for almost 10 days and gosh..the money sure was rolling in because he continued to deny the slaughter was back open.

    But..he got caught.

    Just an "honest mistake" he claimed. No fraud intended

    A worthy source for the Rara crowd.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Nov. 15, 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    5,659

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairfax View Post
    John Holland Horses for Habitat...remember Angela when you and your buddies were cheering that ALL slaughter was closed ... gone..kaphoot?

    John Holland went on his website almost demanding DONATTIONS as all of these horses caught in the transport pipeline were going to need new homes

    He wanted 1 MILLION DOLLARS so he could provide immediate refuge for the TEN THOUSAND HORSES HE KNEW were in transport. He wanted the money now.

    He continued to run that on his website and blog for almost 10 days and gosh..the money sure was rolling in because he continued to deny the slaughter was back open.

    But..he got caught.

    Just an "honest mistake" he claimed. No fraud intended

    A worthy source for the Rara crowd.
    You have so much to say but none of it is ever about the content of the conversation, the facts of the matter.
    Why is that?


    3 members found this post helpful.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jul. 23, 2008
    Location
    Da UP, eh
    Posts
    749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lori B View Post
    ...

    But operating a slaughterhouse is a business that essentially turns an individual (Pookey, the horse) into a commodity (horse meat, $X a pound). It makes no damned difference to the SH operator which horse they put in a can. It can make a great deal of difference to the past owner of Pookey who was lied to about his intended destination. Not to mention Pookey himself. So I say, tell the slaughterhouse operator that they are obligated as a condition of their license to sell any horse that an individual shows up to buy w/ cash and a trailer. No questions asked, no bull$hit about what they were told to do.
    ...
    What I am proposing is ONLY FOR SLAUGHTERHOUSES ONLY FOR SLAUGHTERHOUSES as a provision of their licensure.

    This accomplishes 2 things: no more Backstreet Bully stories, or SH loses its license, and people who deem a horse to dangerous to be owned by someone else are obligated to see the deed done themselves.
    Well, to start with, the 'live' home would have to offer more that the horse is worth 'by the pound' to make it worth the SH's time.

    The way (any) assembly line process works means that any deviation from the 'line process' means lost productivity, extra personnel costs, and that increased down time leads to missed deadlines. The "live home" would have to be willing to compensate the SH for all down time, staff time and the cost of the horse (and possibly holding fees). Time is money and most people aren't willing to pay that that time is worth.

    The next issue is how would that live home find 'their' horse (honestly, I don't know how slaughter facilities are run). I strongly doubt that they have a bar code scanner that will tell them that Hip 479 is actually Doc Pine Zip, former beloved horse of Mrs. Noseypants.
    How is the owner supposed to find that horse? Tell the slaughter staff to scour the facility for a sorrel gelding with a sock (remember, time=money)? Is a property and business owner supposed to allow unknown persons to wander about the facility willy-nilly, with or without an escort (more personnel costs)?

    I understand that you are emotional about this, but your proposal makes no logical sense whatsoever.

    The only tried and true way to keep Pookie from slaughter (or starvation, or rollkur, or parelli or whathaveyou) is to never sell.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Nov. 15, 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    5,659

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amm2cd View Post
    Well, to start with, the 'live' home would have to offer more that the horse is worth 'by the pound' to make it worth the SH's time.

    The way (any) assembly line process works means that any deviation from the 'line process' means lost productivity, extra personnel costs, and that increased down time leads to missed deadlines. The "live home" would have to be willing to compensate the SH for all down time, staff time and the cost of the horse (and possibly holding fees). Time is money and most people aren't willing to pay that that time is worth.

    The next issue is how would that live home find 'their' horse (honestly, I don't know how slaughter facilities are run). I strongly doubt that they have a bar code scanner that will tell them that Hip 479 is actually Doc Pine Zip, former beloved horse of Mrs. Noseypants.
    How is the owner supposed to find that horse? Tell the slaughter staff to scour the facility for a sorrel gelding with a sock (remember, time=money)? Is a property and business owner supposed to allow unknown persons to wander about the facility willy-nilly, with or without an escort (more personnel costs)?
    Let's change this up a bit to... the slaughter plant is alerted that Pookie [is that what we're calling hypothetical horsie?] is, verifiably, LOADED to the gills with drugs.
    The drugs ALL the consumer groups do not want in the meat they import.
    The bad drugs.
    All of them.
    And large doses of each of them.

    Regardless of why they need to find the horse, they should be able to trace Pookie and locate Pookie... don't you think?

    Re: what I bolded.. ever seen a hip tag? I'm guessing not.
    Last edited by Angela Freda; Apr. 4, 2013 at 07:18 PM. Reason: grammer



  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jun. 30, 2006
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California
    Posts
    4,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amm2cd View Post

    The next issue is how would that live home find 'their' horse (honestly, I don't know how slaughter facilities are run). I strongly doubt that they have a bar code scanner that will tell them that Hip 479 is actually Doc Pine Zip, former beloved horse of Mrs. Noseypants.
    How is the owner supposed to find that horse? Tell the slaughter staff to scour the facility for a sorrel gelding with a sock (remember, time=money)? Is a property and business owner supposed to allow unknown persons to wander about the facility willy-nilly, with or without an escort (more personnel costs)?
    If a horse needs to be found, it can be:

    The case of Canuki and Cactus Cafe is nearing its conclusion, at least for the horses. The two Thoroughbreds became famous in May when their surprising return from the Richelieu slaughterhouse in Canada led the horsemeat company to stop accepting Thoroughbreds and raised questions about the effectiveness of racetrack anti-slaughter policies.

    http://www.drf.com/news/banned-train...aughter-policy
    Proud owner of a Slaughter-Bound TB from a feedlot, and her surprise baby...!
    http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e350/Jen4USC/fave.jpg
    http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...SC/running.jpg


    1 members found this post helpful.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jul. 23, 2008
    Location
    Da UP, eh
    Posts
    749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela Freda View Post
    Let's change this up a bit to... the slaughter plant is alerted that Pookie [is that what we're calling hypothetical horsie?] is, verifiably, LOADED to the gills with drugs.
    The drugs ALL the consumer groups do not want in the meat they import.
    The bad drugs.
    All of them.
    And large doses of each of them.

    Regardless of why they need to find the horse, they should be able to trace Pookie and locate Pookie... don't you think?

    Re: what I bolded.. ever seen a hip tag? I'm guessing not.
    I imagine it would be cheaper and easier to test all outgoing meat processed on XX day, however an potential FDA violation is a very different story than finding a particular horse for a hypothetical and potentially expensive law where a former owner can reclaim said horse on a whim.
    It's a very basic cost analysis; shutting down production to prevent a potential crisis vs inspecting every piece of inventory on the whim on a potentially uninvolved party.

    Oh, and as for 'Pookie'... I believe Lori B started that nickname. We could call it 'Product', for all that it would matter.

    As for the bar code comment. Please read the second half of that sentence. The only way to that a "factory installed" sticker would help Pookie/Product (see what I did there? Just for you.) is if it referenced every bill of sale/breeder/registry info so that the potentially interested party could be reunited with the right plain bay gelding (or however you want to imagine Pookie/Product). If the hip tag only references the information on the coggins that accompanied the horse... well, it may or may not be worth the paper it's written on.

    So, to bounce this back to the OP, I'll say again, that no, the SH is under, and should be under, no obligation to sell.
    JMO, obviously.



  8. #88
    Join Date
    Aug. 5, 2007
    Posts
    985

    Default

    More on Viande Richelieu declining to accept (USA origin) Thoroughbreds apparently to avoid disruption of plant business to find horses in the future.

    http://www.drf.com/news/canadian-sla...-thoroughbreds

    I do wonder how they were able to export 'for meat only' horses from Canada: I'm going to assume they were not precisely that since they seem to have gone past the 72 hour processing rule?

    People interested in recovering horses really ought to dig for the details on this one. It only takes one to set a precedent.



  9. #89
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2004
    Location
    Catonsville, MD
    Posts
    6,784

    Default

    I find the assertion that showing up with $$ and a trailer and a hip number (I want that horse there.) is catastrophically disruptive to slaughterhouses to be laughable and not plausible. Are you saying that slaughterhouses have exactly no downtime, not even a crappy paddock that horses about to be processed are kept in before they are killed and cut to bits? It's just one giant well-oiled machine without 10 seconds of slack? Really?

    It is my understanding that in the most egregious of these cases, the person seeking to acquire a slaughterbound horse knew exactly which hip number they wanted. There was no question of identity, there was just inexcusably shitty behaviour on the part of the SH staff.

    I am not suggesting that staff have to sort through the horses to find anything but a hip number. As usual on this thread, people argue with my proposal by either inventing circumstances that are not part of what I suggest, or by saying some version of "it's mine, and you can't make me". The volume and incoherence of the arguments against that I am hearing makes me believe that it's a pretty good idea.

    And IF this proposal is such a catastrophe for slaughterhouses, then I guess they had better be sure that they don't acquire horses through lying and misrepresentation.

    Just not seeing any problems here.

    Any day that I make veins stand up on Fairfax's forehead is a day that I consider a success.
    I tolerate all kinds of animal idiosyncrasies.
    I've found that I don't tolerate people idiosyncrasies as well. - Casey09




  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jun. 30, 2011
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Lori,

    Perhaps you should turn up your hearing aid! Behaviour as you suggest would currently have you arrested in Canada and possibly charged with terrorism.
    Your attitude that you know better than anyone else is laughable. Once again, it sounds like Wayne has managed to send one of his hired posters to the board to stir it up!



  11. #91
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    15,635

    Default

    I don't agree with LoriB that it would be as simple as it sounds to pull a particular horse from a slaughter plant, but terrorism? Really?

    7arabians, LoriB has been posting on COTH for almost 10 years...paid poster? I think not. However, I do wonder what financial interest you have in the slaughter industry. Either that or you're channeling Kelsey LeFever.

    Comrade Laura
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant



  12. #92
    Join Date
    Jun. 30, 2011
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Laura,
    You are well aware of Wayne's rara sisterhood's tactics. They are called 'sleepers' and only post when directed by Wayne. Lori's clearly acting at the behest of the man!



  13. #93
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    15,635

    Default

    Now LoriB is a sleeper? Been watching The Americans on TV a little too often?

    So what's your financial interest in slaughter, 7arabians?
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant



  14. #94
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2004
    Location
    Catonsville, MD
    Posts
    6,784

    Default

    I don't think it would be terrible to inconvenience a slaughterhouse and that is terrorism? Wow.

    The fact that this crowd once again is stuck resorting to calling people who disagree with them and don't accept their assertions that they work for Wayne Pacelle tells you all you need to know about actual arguments that they have available to them: none.

    Ranting is done on my own time and on my own dime. Sorry to prove you wrong again.
    I tolerate all kinds of animal idiosyncrasies.
    I've found that I don't tolerate people idiosyncrasies as well. - Casey09




  15. #95
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Lori
    Which slaughter plant have you gone to for a full inspection?

    When, Where and who was the operating company?



  16. #96
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2004
    Location
    Catonsville, MD
    Posts
    6,784

    Default

    I don't care if this isn't 'workable', according to whomever. And anyone who let's themself be suckered into caring what slaughter houses want is being duped.

    Y'all do not get it. I am ok w/ a rule like this making life difficult for slaughterhouses. I am not trying to make their lives run smoothly so that they get home at 5 on the dot to wash the blood off their hands.

    This rules intention is to put the burden on slaughterhouses to not source horses which have been fraudulently acquired or which have willing and present alternative buyers. Don't try to tell me that there are never any such horses in slaughterhouses, because we hear quite plausible reports of such on this board quite regularly.

    People like Fairfax and his cohort make it sound like slaughterhouses are doing us all a favor by operating, and that any request that they comply with any kind of openness about drugs, or where the horses come from will shatter the precious role they play in upholding .. god only knows what. But in fact, slaughterhouses require all kinds of things from the communities in which they are located. They stink to high heaven, they are huge users of clean water (which is getting scarcer and scarcer), their waste is processed through wastewater treatment facilities which are built with their communities property taxes, they are served by police and firefighters which are funded by taxes, they are inspected by FDA inspectors (or your local equivalent in Canada, etc.) which are also funded by ... your taxes! (are you starting to see a theme here?)

    Expecting such facilities to accept and abide by regulations is, when you think of it this way, simple reciprocity. You operate in our community, benefit from our tax base, then you play by our rules. Letting propertarians tell us that regulations are an unconscionable abridgement of their sacred freedom is baloney.

    The right is obsessed with 'you don't get something for nothing.' Well, I say, that's right. Businesses shouldn't expect to benefit from all the tax-funded amenities that underly their ability to operate without accepting some reasonable level of regulation. And I still believe that people seeking specific horses will be quite rare. They will be even more rare if SHs stop buying from notorious brokers who lie to acquire horses. Such brokers are routinely discussed on this board, so don't tell me there is no such thing.

    Slaughter opponents: don't let your desire to appear reasonable to this crowd cow you into accepting their terms of debate and their shrieking assertions of grievance and woe. Be skeptical, and don't give ground to bullies.

    The fact that I am drawing such of stream of angst from them is all the proof you need that they know they are losing.
    I tolerate all kinds of animal idiosyncrasies.
    I've found that I don't tolerate people idiosyncrasies as well. - Casey09



    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    15,635

    Default

    Bute is not the only problem. How about Furazone? That's my go to with DMSO for a sweat. Furall too...when you could still buy it.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #98
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Lori

    The Fort MacLeod slaughter plant is well accepted in Fort MacLeod. It provides employment. It has been a long time employer (decades)

    They are located about 5 miles out of the town. There is a lot of land for grazing for many of the horses (640 acre land groups) plus they grow their own feed plus purchase grains from the local economy.


    Slaughter plants do not solicit stolen horses or fraudently acquired horses knowingly.

    They are as careful as they can be however they are not going to run DNA checks on horses that were purchased for slaughter. You might not be aware but many years ago there was a form one could attach to the AQHA papers saying Person X wanted to be notified if horse was going to slaughter so they could save it.

    They spent THOUSANDS of dollars and probably the same in hours and phone calls to these people who had died, lost interest, didn't care OR wanted the horse returned to the U.S. for FREE.,

    People did sue to try and block slaughter by claiming they had been promised first buy back rights for THAT horse etc.

    It just did not work.

    They pay taxes. They are not heavy users of water any more than "a truck stock with 20 bays for the large Road King groups). Those sludge oil and chemicals right back into the water.

    The taxes are charged to the company including the shipping companies for transportation of the horses to the plant and also the frozen meat boxes to export. ALL companies receive benefits such as police protection and fire department. Why would they need to be excluded. Their employees pay school taxes and so does the business based on their property value and since they do not farm the land, they are also charged a yearly tax on it..something farmers and ranchers do not have to pay



    Social services pays for young girls to have a safe delivery for their child out of wedlock. Taxes pay for that even if I disagree with it. Taxes pay for seniors to have a better living by offering them subsidized housing. Individuals with disabilities are given subsidization out of my taxes.

    The roads I travel are paid for by taxes and are driven on by members of church faiths I do not agree with however I do not believe they should be excluded from using them just because I don't care for their religion.

    Strange. You think you are winning? My gosh...how wrong you are


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: Dec. 18, 2012, 02:35 PM
  2. What can a vet require an owner to do?
    By Sacred_Petra in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Oct. 20, 2011, 04:43 AM
  3. Best age to sell for a profit...
    By DLee in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Feb. 4, 2010, 02:21 PM
  4. Starting a horse non-profit to help re-home horses?
    By want_to_help in forum Off Course
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Dec. 9, 2009, 12:20 PM
  5. *Spinoff* To sell or not to sell show clothing
    By pleasedaspunch in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Aug. 18, 2009, 11:41 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness