The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 168
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,981

    Default Those unwanted horses.

    Here is an organization trying to do something about all those unwanted horses, unwanted horses, by the way, some deny exist.

    They start by proposing guidelines for their care, so the many rescues that are springing up all over will not be part of the problem of caring for those horses, some even becoming "collectors", as it seems to be happening more and more:

    http://www.unwantedhorsecoalition.org/

    The real question here is and will always be, are we going to ever change the horse industry so it only produces enough horses so each one has a home?
    Is that a realistic expectation, that we will only bring forth horses that are all usable and that those that may not be, rather than being used once more thru the slaughter process, as most livestock we raise do, be cared for thru our resources thru their long lives?

    Does our society can afford that, or will the majority of humans then object, that don't care about society now spending those kinds of resources on unwanted horses, when HUMANS and much other in this world needs attention?

    Remember, there are only so many resources out there for all.
    I doubt that the world will think is sensible to spend way more than is reasonable on horses no one wants.
    We already do, with all we do with our horses and that is of indirect benefit to how our societies work, but if we overstep and use too many resources, others that don't care for horses may then boicott us, as some suggest we boicott those that think slaughter, as long as there is an excess horses, makes more sense than providing social security and medicaid for those excess horses for their entire lives, when they could be harvested for other purposes.

    Animal rights fanatics already boicot most we do with animals, as they don't think humans should use them at all.
    Do we want to have a society eventually that is run by those people?

    Just a few important questions, for when you want to use your money and resources supporting those you think will help the world become what you want it to be.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb. 11, 2005
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Gee, that sounds like a great organization with lovely ideas -- it's a shame they are pro-slaughter (oops, I mean "pro horse harvesting").

    And it is also a shame that it is time for yet another pro-slaughter rant about how the "animal rights fanatics" are out to get all of us horse owners and how "vital" the slaughter industry is.



  3. #3

    Default

    I'm 100% pro slaughter but to be honest " unwanted " horses are very very rare I go to auctions in Mn. the Dakotas, Ok., Mo. and Tx. and I've yet to see one at any of them yet. I live in about the lowest income county in the state and I can think of two horses over the years that were unwanted. I have seen many many horses that the owner wanted more money then offered. I've known many many horses the owner wanted to sell cheap but no one wanted them but a meat buyer. The owner was anti slaughter so wouldn't sell to them.

    But everyone of those horses was wanted.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug. 23, 2006
    Posts
    1,757

    Angry Oh please....!

    *Bluey* - did you, or any of your co-pro-slaughter crowd every hear of something called HUMANE EUTHANASIA? If this is a new word, or concept to you?

    It is a humane way to end a life, in this case, the lives of horses who are truly unusable, who cannot live any good quality of life, who are so ill or injured that continuing their lives would be seen as cruel.

    And no, I do not believe that sending such horses on one more journey through the slaughter system is a humane choice at all. Why should they be forced to suffer one more time, all of the abuse and inhumane treatment that goes hand in hand with that industry, just so that some greedy people can squeeze one last dollar out of them! Remember, in this country we do not need horse meat for any purpose and horses are not raised as part of our food supply!

    And here's another "new" concept - how about the owners of all of these unwanted horses take responsibility for them! All horses have an owner - just because that owner doesn't want them (unwanted?) doesn't mean that they shouldn't be responsible for them, whether that responsibility means selling them, finding them a new home, giving them away, training them or having them trained so that they can be re-homed, or humanely euthanizing them if they no longer can be expected to have any quality of life!



  5. #5

    Default

    Oh in answer to the question about do I think we will get to the point of only breeding enough horses to meet the deamand without slaughter? No I don't think were even going to come close we have 35% more horses now then 15 years ago and only 10% more demand. The majority of horses bred are done so as a hobby making money on them never is an issue. The cost of keeping them is going to go up very rapidly I think in the coming years. More and more land is being taken out of farming so feed costs will keep going higher. We are at some point going to ban slaughter so theres no outlet there to keep numbers down at all. We won't mass kill them like we do dogs and cats so theres going to be more and more older horses standing around each year. More horses means less hay and grain to go around.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  6. #6
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,981

    Default

    ---"But everyone of those horses was wanted."---

    Yes, WAS wanted, as long as someone could use it one more time at slaughter.

    The details is what matters, when we want to find a definition for "unwanted".

    It would be very nice to have an utopian world, where every being, human and animals, had a good place, with a purpose and without wants and no one would abuse any of our resources.



  7. #7

    Default

    So Claddagh are you saying inhumane treatment is OK as long as its food you or others like to eat? To me inhumane is just that regardless if its a horse, cow, or what ever species.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  8. #8
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Claddagh View Post
    *Bluey* - did you, or any of your co-pro-slaughter crowd every hear of something called HUMANE EUTHANASIA? If this is a new word, or concept to you?

    It is a humane way to end a life, in this case, the lives of horses who are truly unusable, who cannot live any good quality of life, who are so ill or injured that continuing their lives would be seen as cruel.

    And no, I do not believe that sending such horses on one more journey through the slaughter system is a humane choice at all. Why should they be forced to suffer one more time, all of the abuse and inhumane treatment that goes hand in hand with that industry, just so that some greedy people can squeeze one last dollar out of them! Remember, in this country we do not need horse meat for any purpose and horses are not raised as part of our food supply!
    Humane euthanasia is right in many instances and no one disputes that.
    It is right for a horse, one of many, that doesn't has any use, that no one wants AND so could be used one more time thru harvesting and so become one more resource we use.

    You are falling again on the fallacy that slaughter itself is inhumane, which is not, any more than rescues are inhumane.
    It is not that some horses may have been abused in any place, including rescues, any more than thru the slaughter system some horses may have been abused some time.
    Again, throwing the baby out with the bathwater?



  9. #9

    Default

    Bluey I really don't see the big deal figuring out the word " wanted " if someone is willing to take a horse be it for free or with money its wanted. If no one wants it for any reason or way its " unwanted ". Its really very basic.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr. 12, 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    620

    Angry OMG do these anti-slaughter people have any common sense????

    These ding dongs PETA nuts are going to RUIN the horse business and pleasure horse business. The rescues are overflowing here in MD....they won't take a horse or pony unless it is sellable (well DUH if it was sellable the owner would have sold it!!!!!!) or the state seizes them so they get some money to take care of them. I don't blame them as there a TONS of unusable (not sound, blind, nuts, etc.) horses they are already taking care of.

    This it what happens when a vocal minority decide to "run" the horse business and "save" the poor little slave horses from their "horrible" owners. This is the same group that thinks jumping, hunting, racing, barrel racing, penning, etc. are "cruel"!

    But the point is there is just X number of owners and 10X horses which is dwindling as the economy goes through a recession. Just in 3 years, the market has taken a dramatic dip as I have watched horses at our local sales barn sit for yet another winter.

    The auctions are selling horses for $300 and I have watched the joyful owners being bucked off, reared on, taken off on, and spending thousands on trainers before trucking them back to the auction to sell them as is for $100 or just plain giving them away. Horses that would have had a lot less grief if they had been taken to the meat market to at least get some good out of them instead of being passed on to the next lucky winner. The sad part is that the good horses are so outnumbered by the bad ones, that they are going for $300 too which can't possibly support the reputable breeder!

    Owning and enjoying a horse (i.e. using a vet, boarding or owning a farm, buying feed and hay, buying tack, showing at horse shows, etc.) supports farms and open spaces.



  11. #11

    Default

    If I only got $300 for my horses I'd quit breeding., And according to the AHC here in Mn. were always in the bottom 5 states for average price.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov. 15, 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    6,762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy123 View Post
    But the point is there is just X number of owners and 10X horses which is dwindling as the economy goes through a recession.
    Actually the number of "unwanted horses" who go to slaughter is only 1% of the entire horsey population. I do not think that translates to 10x horses to X owners.

    Bluey I actually think you ask some very good questions.
    "Is that a realistic expectation, that we will only bring forth horses that are all usable and that those that may not be, rather than being used once more thru the slaughter process, as most livestock we raise do,..."
    That is a hard one, becuse in breeding at the best farms under the best practices foals who are less than expected happen. Law of averages I guess.
    But I do disagree with the idea that most other livestock that is slaughtered is done so secondary to their intended purpose, like horses are presently. Most other slaughtered livestock is raised for that purpose, right? Even those 4H bulls and pigs are expected to finish their (short) careers in the 4H and go to slaughter.

    "Remember, there are only so many resources out there for all.
    I doubt that the world will think is sensible to spend way more than is reasonable on horses no one wants."
    Right now it's personal discretionary funds most people use to "rescue", though there are some who have no indoor plumbing and can not afford to feed themselves without hitting the county food pantry and yet are trying to buy more "rescue" horses at auction. *sigh*
    Define what is "reasonable" to spend on a horse no one wants? If no one wants it for a legit reason (lame, blind, psycho, whatever...) I say euthanise it. It's kinder.

    Another question I ask myself all the time is "what is a 'rescue'"?



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug. 23, 2006
    Posts
    1,757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy123 View Post
    These ding dongs PETA nuts are going to RUIN the horse business and pleasure horse business.
    Well at least you've got that right!

    But what you don't have right is your assumtion that anyone who is against horse slaughter is automatically a PETA supporter! Just because someone is aware of, and supports, animal welfare (in this case horses) does not give you pro-slaughter fanatics the right to ignore our position on animal welfare and catagorize us as animal rights supporters. *Animal welfare* and *animal rights* are two vastly different concepts! Maybe you should learn the difference before you start ranting!



  14. #14

    Default

    And maybe some anti slaughter people should learn that just because someone is pro slaughter it doesn't mean their monsters. The world is a two way street.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct. 18, 2000
    Posts
    22,454

    Default

    tennygirl et al:

    I think it is the height of conceit to suppose that anti-slaughter advocates are the only ones concerned about the welfare of horses. How egotistical.

    Whether one is pro-slaughter or not should be irrelevant. If a pro-slaughter group or person is willing to acknowledge that problems exist, and work towards solving those problems, reducing the numbers of horses that end up in those awful auctions........ exactly what is wrong with that?

    I find it interesting that anti-slaughter groups are not willing to work within the industry or form real partnerships. The attitude is if you are not a supporter of a ban, you're not a real horseman. Or you don't love animals. Or you profit from selling horses to slaughter. Or you approve of inhumane treatment. yatta yatta. That's all y'all can come up with? Histrionics?

    It is quite possible to support the notion of horses as a protein source, and not support inhumane treatment, or lax enforcement of laws, etc.

    It is possible to make the argument that every animal currently in our nations animal shelters is not truly "unwanted" - because somewhere, someone would be willing to take it in. This is plausible. But the realities are different. And in many shelters across the country - shelter conditions and methods of euthanasia make slaughterhouses look like vegas resorts.

    It's not an either/or proposition. A person/group can be pro-slaughter and be an active and vociferous proponent for reform and humane treatment. The fact that you'd dismiss the entire coalition with nothing more than a sneer and a wave of your hand..... tells me a lot about YOU.



  16. #16

    Default

    Angela your question " what is a Rescue"? Is a very good one I think " rescue " has become the most over used word in the horse world today. To me " rescue " means you save something from injury or death. You don't do it for money you do it because its the right thing to do. If you take in say horses and sell them be it for a adotion fee, rescue fee, donation, or sale price your not rescuing anything your selling a horse. No differant then any other species of livestock.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  17. #17

    Default

    J Swan, very very very good post. One of the biggest reasons theres such a problem with getting the two sides to work with each other is the attitude you describe. Over and over pro slaughter people tell me there fed up with the attitude from the anti side and have no desire any more to even be around them.
    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.



  18. #18
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J Swan View Post
    tennygirl et al:

    I think it is the height of conceit to suppose that anti-slaughter advocates are the only ones concerned about the welfare of horses. How egotistical.

    Whether one is pro-slaughter or not should be irrelevant. If a pro-slaughter group or person is willing to acknowledge that problems exist, and work towards solving those problems, reducing the numbers of horses that end up in those awful auctions........ exactly what is wrong with that?

    I find it interesting that anti-slaughter groups are not willing to work within the industry or form real partnerships. The attitude is if you are not a supporter of a ban, you're not a real horseman. Or you don't love animals. Or you profit from selling horses to slaughter. Or you approve of inhumane treatment. yatta yatta. That's all y'all can come up with? Histrionics?

    It is quite possible to support the notion of horses as a protein source, and not support inhumane treatment, or lax enforcement of laws, etc.

    It is possible to make the argument that every animal currently in our nations animal shelters is not truly "unwanted" - because somewhere, someone would be willing to take it in. This is plausible. But the realities are different. And in many shelters across the country - shelter conditions and methods of euthanasia make slaughterhouses look like vegas resorts.

    It's not an either/or proposition. A person/group can be pro-slaughter and be an active and vociferous proponent for reform and humane treatment. The fact that you'd dismiss the entire coalition with nothing more than a sneer and a wave of your hand..... tells me a lot about YOU.
    Well said!

    I came across that organization and thought it sounded interesting, didn't noticed if it was pro or anti horse slaughter, didn't think that such mattered now, since it seems slaughter is on the way out anyway.
    Thanks for pointing that out in such a clear way.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2001
    Location
    Chesterfield, NH
    Posts
    1,374

    Default

    My issue with slaughter and why I'm opposed to it is how the animals (all animals, not just horses) are treated en route and during the slaughter process. I agree that it would be a good thing to "harvest" and make use of these animals once again, whether to feed other animals or for another purpose (I'm also willing to be an organ donor or have my body donated to science, might as well get a little more use out of me right?).
    I am one of those people who bought a horse at an auction, although not a meat auction, and found that I could not work with him because of his temperment and because of my child, he wasn't safe to be around her. So with help he found a great home that I gave him to. If I hadn't found him a home I was absolutely willing to humanely euthanize, but I was never going to send him to slaughter, even though he ended up costing me money.
    Just my story.
    Grab mane and kick on!



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar. 9, 2007
    Posts
    434

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by county View Post
    If you take in say horses and sell them be it for a adotion fee, rescue fee, donation, or sale price your not rescuing anything your selling a horse. No differant then any other species of livestock.
    I don't get this. How can asking for a fee to cover a program's expenses be the same as selllng a horse?



Similar Threads

  1. Unwanted horses with physical problems...
    By FineAlready in forum Off Course
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: Sep. 15, 2012, 11:24 PM
  2. Unwanted horses - Project/ please help
    By TXPiaffe in forum Off Course
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: Dec. 2, 2011, 05:54 PM
  3. EN Article on Unwanted Horses
    By graytbmare in forum Eventing
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Aug. 23, 2010, 10:17 PM
  4. Bad economy, unwanted horses
    By Beverley in forum Off Course
    Replies: 147
    Last Post: Jul. 1, 2008, 07:23 PM
  5. Epdemic of unwanted horses or what?
    By snkstacres in forum Off Course
    Replies: 319
    Last Post: Jul. 25, 2007, 12:02 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
  •