• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 2/8/18)
See more
See less

Cavel horse slaughter plant is trying to rebuild plant in DeKalb ILL

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Natty Dread:
    Noone knows the numbers of horses shipped live to plants in Japan. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I'll see what I can do to find exact numbers, but according to the White Paper (linked above). Whatever the numbers, the demand for horsemeat from foreign sources (live or packaged) is apparently on the same level of decline.

    According to the FAO, the Japanese, who are almost entirely dependent on foreign suppliers for their horsemeat, imported over 51,000 metric tons of it in 1980. By 2000, that total had dropped nearly 80% to just over 10,000 metric tons, a number which is expected to continue falling in coming years.

    Two Toofs
    (formerly - but still - NDANO)

    Comment


    • #82
      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:
      (Not meaning to be insulting or giving a personal jab to anyone here, but am I the only one who took Business 101 and Economics 101 in college? I'm honestly surprised at the difficulty of grasping the concept of supply and demand.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

      I'm trying to envision the scenario where this could possibly avoid being insulting or a jab, but I think it would have to involve lots of alcohol and an incredibly close friendship...

      Now maybe it's just me, but when I am trying to explain a point and someone doesn't seem to get it, but it still discussing things in a rational way, I usually assume it is me who has failed in the explanation. But I am just silly that way.



      Reading for comprehension... Always a challenge!

      Call your village. Their idiot is missing...
      Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

      Comment


      • #83
        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>If the market dictates that they will not make a profit by paying more than $300 for a horse, all one needs to do is bid $325. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

        You run right out and outbid them, then. I, who care deeply about this, can't afford to and take proper care of my own horses.

        How long is it taking those poor, starved, frightened and tightly packed horses going by truck from auction to auction, state to state, until there is a full load to get to that feedlot where they are fattened?

        Friendship is Love without his wings
        -Lord Byron
        "If you would have only one day to live, you should spend at least half of it in the saddle."

        Comment


        • #84
          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:

          I'm trying to envision the scenario where this could possibly _avoid_ being insulting or a jab, but I think it would have to involve lots of alcohol and an incredibly close friendship...

          Now maybe it's just me, but when I am trying to explain a point and someone doesn't seem to get it, but it still discussing things in a rational way, I usually assume it is me who has failed in the explanation. But I am just silly that way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

          The reason I prefaced it in the way that I did is because I was at a loss to word it any other way. So I stated, pretty clearly, that I didn't mean it as a personal jab or insult at anyone at all, because I knew it was going to sound that way. I don't know how I could have said any more clearly that it was not meant to be taken as an insult (just as sometimes when you state that someone is 'ignorant', they will take it the wrong way no matter what, even though it isn't necessarily an insult and is not a synonym for words like 'stupid').

          It's just that I apparently made a huge error in thinking that things like supply & demand were pretty much 'basic' kernels of knowledge within an apparently very well-spoken and apparently fairly well-educated group of people.

          Two Toofs
          (formerly - but still - NDANO)

          Comment


          • #85
            I guess it is one of those moments that if you know that no matter how you phrase it and no matter how good your intentions are, it will still sound insulting, then you really better mean to be insulting. I mean why waste a good insult?

            And maybe - just maybe - since this seems to be a "well-spoken and apparently fairly well-educated group of people," the inability to communicate such a basic kernal of knowledge like "supply and demand" effectively might just possibly be equally shared?


            Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?

            Call your village. Their idiot is missing...
            Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

            Comment


            • #86
              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It's just that I apparently made a huge error in thinking that things like supply & demand were pretty much 'basic' kernels of knowledge within an apparently very well-spoken and apparently fairly well-educated group of people.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

              I think you just managed to insult everyone AGAIN.

              I am curious, though -- as long as we're talking about supply and demand. What effect would banning slaughter for human consumption in the US have on the supply and demand?

              The horses slaughtered here are shipped overseas. Obviously if countries where horsemeat is consumed are already importing it, they don't have a readily available supply in the same price range. So it stands to reason that they're going to continue to import it from somewhere... just not from the US.

              If we ban equine slaughter here, and the demand for horsemeat stays the same, all we're doing is leaving a market share open and available for other countries to step in with their supply.

              Now, if the US is one of the cheaper suppliers of horsemeat, I could see that eliminating our contribution to the supply could have an effect on demand -- if the price of horsemeat in France goes up because it's more expensive to import it from, say, Brazil than the US, then demand might go down.

              But since it seems that most horsemeat is already imported from somewhere, and since the US probably has some of the stricter regulations governing slaughter (and those pesky regulations make it more expensive for the industry), I would imagine that it wouldn't be significantly more expensive (if it were more expensive at all) for horsemeat-eating countries to import from countries other than the US.

              (This is just my theorizing here, though... if someone can prove me wrong, feel free. )

              Therefore, demand will likely stay the same (or if it does decrease, it will likely not be due to constricted supply or a jump in price), and the supply will just come from somewhere other than the US. If, for example, 500,000 horses are slaughtered for meat worldwide every year, it stands to reason that if the US outlawed horse slaughter next year, 500,000 horses would STILL be slaughtered for meat in 2004 (if demand stayed the same)... they just wouldn't be US horses.

              And does it really make a difference if the horses being killed for meat come from Boise or Brazil? The horse is still dead.

              Comment


              • #87
                Oh, another question, out of curiosity...

                I assume there are horses that even the killers won't buy at sales like New Holland. What happens to them?

                And one other thing. Two Toofs, would you still pay to register your car if it were voluntary? If, say, the DMV told you that the money from registrations went to pave the roads and improve emissions and generally make the world a better place?

                Maybe you are a nice, responsible person and you would. How many other people do you think would follow suit? Or do you think there's a reason that registration fees are mandatory and not optional?

                Comment


                • #88
                  [QUOTE]Originally posted by Erin:
                  [QUOTE]
                  But since it seems that most horsemeat is already imported from somewhere, and since the US probably has some of the stricter regulations governing slaughter (and those pesky regulations make it more expensive for the industry), I would imagine that it wouldn't be significantly more expensive (if it were more expensive at all) for horsemeat-eating countries to import from countries other than the US.

                  QUOTE]


                  I don't think the regulations here are "any where near" as strict as in Europe.{I would mean England,France or Germany},

                  I think you would find,prices,regulations are MUCH easier/cheaper here,which is why they are importing from us.



                  These are countries that are very strict about, meat tenderizing hormones,and antibiotics and wormers ect.in animals for consumption.Very little info on such things here. The poultry,beef and pork we eat here are raised on antibiotics.Withheld the last few days,if they remember to withhold them.


                  The poorer nations IN THE EEC. want cheap meat,so there will continue to be a market for American meat.

                  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".
                  \"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\".

                  Comment

                  • Original Poster

                    #89
                    An excellant site:This ladys farm had been in her family over 150 years in Kaufman, Texas.Dallas Crown horseslaughtering plant moved right next to Them despite objections.A very informative site on the slaughter issue! www.kaufmanzoning.net/horsemeat

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      It seems that some people want to pick a fight or find insult where there is none. I don't know how much clearer I could make it to say that I meant no personal insult or jab to anyone. I said that I made the mistake of thinking that the concept of supply and demand was common knowledge among educated people. I made the mistake. By me saying I made a mistake, means that it is apparently not a basic kernal of common knowledge among educated people. People can apparently be very educated and well-spoken without understanding supply and demand. That I was in err. That I was wrong. That I should have taken the time to explain the concept or link to a suitable explanation for those who would like to understand the basics, rather than assume that those here would already understand it. I'm a bit flabbergasted that by proclaiming that I made an error, I am somehow insulting people 'again'.

                      It should be apparent to those that do understand it (business majors out there anyone??) that many people in this discussion do not understand it. Does this make these folks that don't understand it horrible people or stupid or wrong in their opinions? No. It just means that they don't understand how supply and demand works. Not exactly the end of the world, and it doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't understand it is stupid or invalid in their opinions. If you choose to take someone pointing out that you don't understand supply and demand as an insult, perhaps you are either a little overly sensitive or looking to find an insult where there are none and perhaps throw around a little sarcasm in what is supposed to be a civilized discussion about real issues and facts.

                      I don't pretend to understand the process of bottling soda, for example. Big whup. I won't take it as an insult if someone tells me I don't understand it, or if someone who does understand it says "you really don't know how much what you are saying about bottling soda is wrong". If I am passionate enough about bottling of soda, I will educate myself at least to the most basic extent. If not, big fat hairy deal. I don't know about it, probably won't ever know about it, and I'm still just as good or bad of a person. I'd be willing to bet that the soda bottlers wouldn't even think I was an evil human being because of my ignorance.

                      The point about the car registration is not whether or not it is a voluntary procedure. It's not voluntary if I choose to own a car. I can, however, choose not to own a car. I won't have to pay the upkeep on the vehicle, and I won't be breaking the law by not doing so. If there is no other recourse for those who choose to own horses, the overwhelming majority will not break the law, and pay the euthanasia fee for the horse that they chose to own. Point being, euthanasia fees should be considered part and parcel of horse ownership, just like providing food and water. The average cost of euthanasia is less than one month's board.

                      Two Toofs
                      (formerly - but still - NDANO)

                      Comment


                      • #91
                        Fernie - Certain countries in Europe may very well have stricter laws regarding slaughter conditions, but its a fair bet that this is not the case in the other 100+ countries in the developing world.

                        Erin - my take is that is the third time, eh? This one looks to be cloaked in the guise of self deprecation. I may have to jot these down for future use and reference (you never know when you will find an Insults 101 class to enroll in):

                        1) I don't mean to insult you, so just give me a pass when I do, because hey, I said I didn't mean it.

                        2) When I tell you it really wasn't an insult you should believe me. And just in case you didn't, I'll let you know you haven't the wit to grasp the point in spite of the fact you seemed to be almost intelligent.

                        3) How could I possibly be insulting you? I said it was my fault I didn't realize you hadn't the IQ to grasp a simple concept taught in a 101 level course, or quite possibly the schoolyard playground. And I strategically used boldface type, so it must be true.

                        I think that about sums it up, don't you? Erin, did I miss any finer points?

                        Two Toofs, just so you know, this has been highly enjoyable for me. I haven't had this good of a grin since ear bunnies were a source of great BB angst. And honestly I haven't even read your stuff on supply and demand, but all I can say is that if it is as well presented as your I Am Not Insulting Anyone epics, I couldn't possibly understand why there might be any lack of understanding.

                        Call your village. Their idiot is missing...
                        Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                        Comment


                        • #92
                          Two Toofs, I'm not "looking for" insults. I just find it a little bit off-putting that you're suggesting the problems are with the readers, rather than with the author. I am 99% certain that all of us understand supply and demand. Some of us may be a couple of decades removed from Econ 101 and might need to be reminded that we understand the concept, but I'm relatively certain that everyone DOES understand it nonetheless.

                          Your explanation of how supply and demand works relative to slaughter a couple pages ago was great... or would have been, had you stopped before the "Didn't you people ever take a business course" comment. Up until that explanation, I'm not sure you had actually spelled out what you meant when talking about supply and demand relative to the topic at hand. So maybe it's not entirely fair to blame the audience, eh?

                          Point being, a clarification of your point would have been much preferable to essentially implying that everyone here is uneducated.

                          ANYway... back to the topic.

                          Fernie, I'm sure you are right about the EU... as someone posted a few pages ago, they're much more strict about the meds their horses get because of the fear that they'll get into the human food chain. But, as DMK pointed out, I would bet there are a LOT of countries out there whose slaughterhouses make American ones look like the KHP.

                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The point about the car registration is not whether or not it is a voluntary procedure. It's not voluntary if I choose to own a car.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                          No, that's exactly the point. I would assume the reason that it is NOT voluntary is because people don't always do what they should do. I would say that if you drive a car in this country, it's your responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of roads... but there ain't no way you're going to be able to get everyone to chip in their fair share unless you make it mandatory.

                          Of course paying for a proper euthanasia should be considered the final act of responsible horse ownership. But, in this country, any buffoon can buy a horse (or a cat or a dog), and there are no guarantees that they'll do what they should do. That's why we're in this mess in the first place.

                          The slaughter ban would do exactly what the mandatory car registration does... force people to do "the right thing" by making it the only legal option.

                          But if we passed such stringent slaughterhouse regulations that equine slaughter became a shining example of humane treatment, we'd essentially be accomplishing the exact same thing, wouldn't we? We'd be using legislation to make it impossible for owners to send horses to an inhumane end, because we can't trust the horse owners themselves to always make the right decision.

                          And that's what many people on this thread have said they feel is the preferable option.

                          Now, if you want to argue that equine slaughter for human consumption is NEVER okay just on principle, no matter how humane it is, then that's a different discussion. But if all we're talking about is a humane end for a horse, then the assertion that better regulations could accomplish the same thing as a slaughter ban is completely valid.

                          Comment


                          • #93
                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
                            I just find it a little bit off-putting that you're suggesting the problems are with the readers, rather than with the author. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            Which is why I've tried to emphasize over and over that it was my error in assumption, not that on the part of the readers. I've stated over and over again, and will continue to do so - every has a right to their own opinion and personal jabs have no place in this discussion and on this forum. We are in agreement on that, I'm certain.

                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
                            Your explanation of how supply and demand works relative to slaughter a couple pages ago was great... or would have been, had you stopped before the "Didn't you people ever take a business course" comment. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            Not exactly how I worded it, but close enough - except for leaving out the part about not wanting to sound insulting, but more in shock as I realized that some people have a vastly different concept of supply and demand.


                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
                            Up until that explanation, I'm not sure you had actually spelled out what you meant when talking about supply and demand relative to the topic at hand. So maybe it's not entirely fair to blame the audience, eh?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            I'm not blaming the audience. I've blamed myself over and over.

                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Point being, a clarification of your point would have been much preferable to essentially implying that everyone here is uneducated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            I stated more than once that I feel the participants in the debate are overwhelmingly well-spoken and well-educated. I stand by that.

                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
                            The slaughter ban would do exactly what the mandatory car registration does... force people to do "the right thing" by making it the only legal option.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            Exactly.

                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>We'd be using legislation to make it impossible for owners to send horses to an inhumane end, because we can't trust the horse owners themselves to always make the right decision.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            We do that now. With laws against animal abuse and cruelty.


                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
                            And that's what many people on this thread have said they feel is the preferable option.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            And they have every right to do so.

                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>

                            Now, if you want to argue that equine slaughter for human consumption is NEVER okay just on principle, no matter how humane it is, then that's a different discussion. But if all we're talking about is a humane end for a horse, then the assertion that better regulations could accomplish the same thing as a slaughter ban is completely valid.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            The humanity in treatment is one thing. Other parts of the issue do also include the 'old standbys' - too many horses, not enough homes, where would they go, etc. This is where I have chosen to educate myself and where I feel the reasoning against slaughter of our horses for human consumption is the most sound. "It's never okay" on principle is very much a part of this discussion. It's the discussion - Slaughter Okay If Humane vs. Never Okay For Any Reason.


                            I very much appreciate you keeping your comments at a civilized level. If we aren't given a chance to explain ourselves if we make an error in judgement without being slammed for it, we often see the deterioration of discussion that happens so often on this subject.

                            Two Toofs
                            (formerly - but still - NDANO)

                            Comment


                            • #94
                              Bottom line, Two Toofs, whether or not you meant to insult, I would be surprised if your comment did not insult, therefore I believe you shouldn't have made it. That's it. Had you not made that comment, this aspect of the discussion would not be happening. And as it is, it's taken up entirely too much bandwidth already.

                              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Two Toofs:
                              The humanity in treatment is one thing. Other parts of the issue do also include the 'old standbys' - too many horses, not enough homes, where would they go, etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                              I don't think those are the only arguments against the slaughter ban that have been offered on this thread. I have skimmed through the TRF white paper, and their statistics are interesting... but I'm not sure anyone has enough information on the subject to be able to say definitively what will or won't happen.

                              Personally speaking, though, the increase in neglect has never been my primary reason for not supporting the slaughter ban legislation. I'm just plain not morally opposed to the idea of equine slaughter for human consumption... and as I said earlier, the US banning it won't actually "save" any horses if the demand stays the same. They'll just be coming from somewhere else.

                              It's a classic case of NIMBY... not in my backyard. As long as it some OTHER country's horses being served up for dinner in France or Japan, it's OK?? That just doesn't make sense to me.

                              Comment


                              • #95
                                Since I left this lively and informative discussion after posting my bucolic and kumbaya experience at the slaughterhouse in order to go to a horse show where I would have cheerfully killed my horse with my bare hands, I'll add another point.

                                As I understand it, there are slaugherhouses where horses are sent to be used for humnan consumption and there are dog food/rendering facilities. The slaughtherhouse has much stricter rules as to the care of the horses before they are killed. For instance, the holding pen at Cavalier was outdoors. The horses were not any more crowded than the trail ride pen at KHP. The horses had to have a supply of clean water. The water was supplied by a scrupulously clean automatic trough. There was a USDA? veterinarian on site all day every day and slaughter could not commence unless he was there. All the horses were in good flesh and appeared healthy. There were many more horses in the surrounding fields, grazing bucolically.

                                I have also been to the auctions at Columbia, TN and Siler City, NC. At the auction, the horses are crowded together and often become trapped in these little run affairs which then resulted in kicking contests. Of course you could avoid this situation by staying with your horse and keeping him separated.
                                *****
                                You will not rise to the occasion, you will default to your level of training.

                                Comment


                                • #96
                                  Two Hoofs--

                                  I do not doubt that your heart is in the right place, and I am kind of like DMK... trying hard to not be insulted by your statement about Econ 101... however, personally, I do not trust the white paper research that you posted. I have taken enough Econ and Statistics classes to know how easy you can manipulate numbers to support whatever stand you want.

                                  Not to mention this white paper was authored by a company which writes white papers for the purposes of marketing as they so call it... ie.. a white paper done by a "marketing communications consultantancy firm" for an organization against horse slaughter is not going to be as unbiased as a complete third party.

                                  Now like I said earlier.. I would never send one of my horse's to horse slaughter.. but I do not think it is the evil that is being tauted.

                                  And I especially distrust any document that can not give full references to where they received their information. So in effect, your numbers posted though they may have come from a "white paper" do not for me mean really anything unless I can find a cross reference from an unbiased and factual source. And I do not mean something that says.. data provided by... if I were to ever have used that kind of reference in any paper even in high school I would have been either accused of plaigirism or not fully citing a reference.

                                  So... when you throw out the white paper and the numbers associated with it... I do not buy your argument of supply and demand.

                                  Even PETA says things that say are true and supported by their articles and papers.

                                  Christina

                                  Comment


                                  • #97
                                    But Midge apparently your experience at the horse slaughterhouse was out of the ordinary and not something that happens usually. So I guess all the ponies had just been given catnip at the time of your arrival.

                                    I have also been to the auctions at Siler City (do they still even have them now?) and never saw anything that would upset me. We bought 2 summer camp prospects and ponies at Siler City-- though the ponies ended up being awesome awesome awesome jumpers!

                                    Christina

                                    Comment


                                    • #98
                                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lucky2day99:
                                      Two Hoofs--
                                      (Two TOOFS)

                                      And I especially distrust any document that can not give full references to where they received their information. So in effect, your numbers posted though they may have come from a "white paper" do not for me mean really anything unless I can find a cross reference from an unbiased and factual source. And I do not mean something that says.. data provided by... if I were to ever have used that kind of reference in any paper even in high school I would have been either accused of plaigirism or not fully citing a reference.
                                      <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                      Sources are stated throughout the article, albeit not presented in the traditional way on the TRF webpage.......

                                      United States International Trade Commission (USITC)
                                      Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
                                      MHR Viandes
                                      Food Safety Inspection System standards
                                      Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
                                      United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
                                      and others.

                                      The numbers of horses slaughtered are readily available through the USDA's website, direct link is:
                                      http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/repo...tock/pls-bban/

                                      I recognize many of the numbers from my own private research from the various sources that they mention, however, I would be happy to contact the company personally and request specific & detailed sources if you'd like. Just because they aren't presented on the webpage shown doesn't mean that they don't exist or that the paper is not factual.

                                      You can independently verify many of the statistics without even leaving your computer by going to google.com. Many of the numbers (such as those slaughtered in the US, those exported for slaughter) are not numbers/statistics to be manipulated. They just are what they are - and they are provided in my replies in response to those wondering what those numbers consisted of.


                                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>rying hard to not be insulted by your statement about Econ 101.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                      If you feel personally insulted by my comments, please try to understand my detailed explanation of them above and accept my personal apology.

                                      Two Toofs
                                      (formerly - but still - NDANO)

                                      Comment


                                      • #99
                                        Supply and Demand is a basic economics concept, but as in physics, translating the basic concept to the real world is always the hard part.

                                        In a frictionless society, supply and demand and price will interact until the optimum point is reached.

                                        We do not live in a frictionless society.

                                        Economic friction comes from incomplete information, from transport costs, from issues of timing, from barriers to entry, and from the inertia of the previous equilibrium.

                                        Demand is not coming from the US. So, changing American attitudes about horsemeat will not affect demand. It could affect supply.. which would make the price go up and make suppliers more interested in producing horsemeat. Hmmm. Is this better?

                                        If slaughter plants are closer to the horses, the transport costs go down, which in turn makes the meat horses more valuable. On the other hand, the horses suffer less.

                                        Where are the Mexican slaughter houses? I'm not sure I buy off hand that transporting to Mexico would necessarily be expensive. Mexican truck drivers aren't paid all that well, and if there are plants just south of the border from NM/AZ/CA, it could be cheaper than a shipment to Texas.

                                        I still don't understand why we're so upset about horses slaughtered for human consumption but we don't care at all about horses slaughtered for pet food.
                                        If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                                        Comment


                                        • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
                                          Many of the numbers (such as those slaughtered in the US, those exported for slaughter) are not numbers/statistics to be manipulated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                          All numbers have assumptions and context that are easily misconstrued or lost.

                                          For example.

                                          The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is represented as "the most reversed" circuit of federal courts. This is true - if you go by number of cases.

                                          Of course, the Ninth Circuit is by far the largest circuit, hearing more cases than any other circuit.

                                          Percentage wise, the Ninth Circuit was overturned 75% of the time. Four other circuits were overturned 100% of the time. (And here in this number is another shady number - because one circuit had only one case heard.) The average across all 80 cases heard by the Supreme Court was 73% reversals.

                                          On the other hand, if you did the math comparing the number of cases in total heard vs. appealed across all courts, you find that the Supreme Court is somewhat more likely to hear a 9th Circuit case. Of course, there are many reasons that could make this so, from the different makeup of the courts to the fact that you would naturally expect a lot more interesting cases to come from large population and legal centers like Los Angeles and San Francisco, than say, Fargo, North Dakota. And this is just the snapshot of one year's worth of cases.

                                          So here you have a very simple idea - and yet, depending upon which numbers I choose to present and how I present them, I can be completely truthful and yet come up with any conclusion I like to "prove" whatever premise I start with.
                                          If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X