• 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.

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 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Disgusting - Video of a horse shot in the head by a slaughter proponent in New Mexico

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
    Actually, the horses that would be euthed at euth clinics are not the same horses that are currently being slaughtered. Euth clinics would euth sick, 3 legged lame, blind, emaciated horses. Killer buyers are not buying those because it is illegal to transport them to slaughter or in the case of emaciation, it isn't profitable. Many of the horses that are bought for slaughter COULD be useful if given the opportunity.
    Maybe you think so, that is not what was talked about, but horses that was nothing wrong other than the owner could not care for them any more, tried to sell and give away and no one wanted, thus ended up in animal control or turned loose, now had the option of euthanizing clinics.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
      I was pointing out the of the exaggeration in the comment that EVERY AR folk in the WORLD had called and threatened:
      Originally Posted by Angela Freda
      “They’ve been threatened — every activist in the world has threatened the company at one time or another,” Chaves County Sheriff Rob Coon told the Los Angeles Times.

      If exaggerations on one side aren't ok, then they aren't ok from either side.
      Or perhaps they have a database of EVERY activist in the WORLD? Funny, I didn't call the plant... hmmmmm
      Now that makes so much sense, right?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JSwan View Post
        You know, there is a reason people take threats seriously. Because once in a while, someone acts on their threat.

        I guess y'all don't give a damn that AR activists in the UK broke into a kennel, beat a hound to death, and tossed it in the driveway of its Master, after making threats. It's ok as long as it's for "the cause".

        Regardless of one's position on hot topic issues (horse slaughter being among them), a line is crossed when people threaten to commit an act of violence.

        Judging by how absolutely crazy some of you act, just on a silly BB, it's apparent that a few are as mentally disturbed as the same folks who make or act on their threats.

        If one disagrees with horse slaughter - that's fine. If one is active in a ban, that's ok too. Shout out support for a ban, write letters, take an ad in the paper, be active politically. That's all legal, moral, and ethical behavior.

        But all of you must allow others to engage in the same behavior; and advocate for their position as well.

        I don't doubt for one second that animal rights activists have tormented the company and its employees. Not for one second. And they've no doubt done it for a long time. At some point those employees are no longer the bad guys. The activists are.

        Because the activists have crossed the line from advocacy into criminal behavior.

        I do not excuse what the person did, because he crossed a line too. If he committed a crime, he should be punished. If what he did was legal (but morally and ethically questionable), maybe just let the world see him for the person he is but leave him alone.

        I feel very strongly about a great many things. I get angry about great injustice and cruelty in this world.

        What I don't do is call or write the objects of my anger and derision and threaten to kill them or their children.

        Maybe y'all should think on that a little.

        Consider that overzealous activism, while understandable, attracts a lot of mentally unhealthy or even unstable people. The internet provides a forum for such people to meet up, to exchange information, and to act out. Often anonymously. Perhaps you think that's ok if it's for a cause you personally believe in or endorse. I don't.

        Because the person on the receiving end has no way of knowing if the threat is idle or if they're going to wake up in a burning home, or with a dead or missing child or family member, or a dead or missing pet or livestock.

        Some of you seem so facile and dismissive about the notion of a company or its employees being threatened. Which indicates you may be as sociopathic as the jerk in the video. Think about it.

        Think about how you would feel and react if people called your home and threatened to harm you or someone or something you cared about. I doubt you'd laugh about it.

        And for the record - I'm not "scaring" anyone off, and I'm not shouting. Nor am I particularly pro-slaughter. I don't give a rip if a foreign company makes money in the US or not. And I think there are all kinds of ways to solve this problem without selling horses for human consumption. Most large problems do not have a simple solution.

        But I am not an idiot, and I can discuss this subject intelligently and rationally.

        What I don't put up with is lies and people who cannot communicate without screeching that I or others brag about slitting horse's throats, or write similar hyperbolic crap that offers nothing of substance.
        Who on here has supported violence or threats?

        The stmt by Chavez is an exaggeration. While I have no doubt they have been threatened by some loons, EVERY one has not threatened them. And most of the vocalizations are not credible threats. Even on threads here, where someone posts about horrific abuse, you have posters saying things like, "Someone should set him on fire, and see how he likes it". Or someone should "(do the same heinous thing, ie beat with pipe, lock in shed and starve)" to him and see how it feels." Yet those posters would never actually do anything cruel to that person...it's a way of venting their anger at an action they find horrendous. I've got no doubt in my mind that the SH has received plenty of those types of comments. But they are harmless and not really valid threats.

        Comment


        • But you see, you are being facile and dismissive. Hanging upon a phrase and ridiculing. Look past the obvious misstatement; and see that the person who uttered it did not intend for it to be taken literally.

          The point is that people, perhaps someone you know, has been making threats.

          That's not acceptable. Ever. If you think it is, you are not the person I thought you were.



          Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
          I was pointing out the of the exaggeration in the comment that EVERY AR folk in the WORLD had called and threatened:
          Originally Posted by Angela Freda
          “They’ve been threatened — every activist in the world has threatened the company at one time or another,” Chaves County Sheriff Rob Coon told the Los Angeles Times.

          If exaggerations on one side aren't ok, then they aren't ok from either side.
          Or perhaps they have a database of EVERY activist in the WORLD? Funny, I didn't call the plant... hmmmmm
          Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
          Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
          -Rudyard Kipling

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
            refinery?



            Good God....mercy me.

            A power plant in ICELAND is probably not running on fossilized fuels, since they tap into the - renewable - energy their volcanic island offers.

            Public education at work?
            That's all you got? Excuse me for not reading the caption to picture. What is it they say...when you are losing a debate you degenerate into name calling and misspelling. I believe that falls under the fallacy of red herring, ad hominem.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
              ---Bluey, you incorrect in stating horses are a renewable resource. To refresh your memory, a renewable resource by definition is:

              a re·new·a·ble re·source
              1.resource that can be sustained: a resource that can be renewed as quickly as it is used up and can, in theory, last indefinitely.

              In order for a horse to be a renewable resource, you would have to find a way to grow a new one from a dead one. Last I heard, once a horse is dead, it's dead. How the heck can a dead horse be renewed? Am I missing something?"---

              You are not serious, are you.

              Yes, you are missing much, but I am afraid I can't help you there, try again, google is your friend, if you can think thru what it brings forth in a sensible manner.

              Yes, horses, by any definition, are the poster child for natural, renewable resources, as the domesticated animals they are.

              No, a dead horse is not "renewable" itself, but is part of that which makes it a natural, renewable asset to us humans.
              A bit like the paper in your book and the wood table you may be using are part of the natural, renewable resource a tree is for us humans.
              Trees also have many other uses while alive.
              Please show me reputable resource where it deems domesticated livestock a"natural" resource, not just propaganda used to make antis appear to be greedy SOB's for not sharing their horses flesh.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JSwan View Post
                But you see, you are being facile and dismissive. Hanging upon a phrase and ridiculing. Look past the obvious misstatement; and see that the person who uttered it did not intend for it to be taken literally.

                The point is that people, perhaps someone you know, has been making threats.

                That's not acceptable. Ever. If you think it is, you are not the person I thought you were.
                Someone I know?
                Oh yes, of course... EVERYONE who is against slaughter is a RaRa whack job. So since I am anti-slaughter, I MUST know these people calling this plant with threats. Gotcha'

                With that attitude, do you really think I would care that you don't think I am the person you thought I was... whatever that means?
                Careful with that broad brush, it can get messy using them.

                ETA
                On second thought, I thank you for that insulting remark... it tells me that the information I've posted that addresses the actual topic surely must be troublesome and proving my point well for the only recourse to be lumping me with a group I'm not associated with and casting insults.
                Last edited by Angela Freda; Mar. 23, 2013, 05:02 PM. Reason: second thought
                Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                Comment


                • Originally posted by LauraKY View Post
                  And once again, pro-slaughter people have managed to scare off a lot of posters who might have something meaningful to add to the conversation. I don't know why you (the pro-slaughter people) think you are winning just because you out shout the others. You're not changing anyone's mind you know.

                  Bluey...
                  H
                  wan·ton
                  /ˈwäntn/
                  Adjective
                  (of a cruel or violent action) Deliberate and unprovoked

                  I do not think the word means what you think it means.

                  If the pro slaughter folks are scaring off posters, than the anti slaughter folks are neck and neck. I call it a tie.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by sunridge1 View Post
                    That's all you got? Excuse me for not reading the caption to picture. What is it they say...when you are losing a debate you degenerate into name calling and misspelling. I believe that falls under the fallacy of red herring, ad hominem.
                    No, I do not excuse you for not reading the capture of the picture.

                    This should be the FIRST thing to read before using it to make your point, ESPECIALLY since it seemed out of place in the context.


                    Oh, right

                    context.....
                    sorry I mentioned it....
                    never mind

                    carry on.
                    Originally posted by BigMama1
                    Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
                    GNU Terry Prachett

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
                      Many of the horses that are bought for slaughter COULD be useful if given the opportunity.
                      So where are the opportunities?
                      Anyone could easily go to the auction or even place an ad in a paper stating they are looking for a cheap horse, so why aren't they?

                      How do you make someone give that animal an opportunity to be useful, an opportunity that hasn't reared its head before the animal ended up in the pipeline?

                      Every single horse that passes through an auction or is sold to whoever shows the money on Craigslist has that opportunity,
                      so why aren't the people who are going to support all these different ways to take care of these horses if slaughter/transport to other countries for slaughter is eliminated just buying these horses already?

                      Wouldn't that eliminate this entire discussion?
                      Take all those people who are going to support rescues, donate for gelding and euthanasia clinics, support programs to provide feed and care for those unable to, etc., and send them to spend that $$ outbidding the killbuyer now at the local auction, and hey, problem solved!
                      Of course, Camelot rescuers have to beg, beg, beg, every week to get people to step up for the few that go through their doors, but I'm sure it'll be easy to round up a few more thousand people to give the rest of the horses that opportunity.

                      Comment


                      • How about this: You want your horse to go to slaughter, you PAY for that "service".
                        ************************
                        \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
                          How about this: You want your horse to go to slaughter, you PAY for that "service".


                          why on earth would you suggest something like that?

                          It would be like an oil company paying me to take their gas...not that I object, mind you....


                          Ok, you made a funny....not back to the discussion!
                          Originally posted by BigMama1
                          Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
                          GNU Terry Prachett

                          Comment

                          • Original Poster

                            OK, so horses are livestock. I don't consider my horses to be livestock, but if you do, that's certainly your perogative.

                            Other livestock industries receive huge government subsidies. So why not provide funding to county animal shelters so that people can surrender their horses? The horses could be held for a short period of time for possible adoption and then euthanized. The horses could then be rendered (solving the waste of the renewable resource problem).

                            We are not talking about thousands, or even hundreds, of horses per animal shelter. Obviously some areas would have more horses than other areas. However, even many urban animal shelters already have the capacity to take horses, but it's usually limited to strays and seizures. Provide some funding and open that up to surrenders. Provide some funding for low-cost geldings as well.

                            Owners would NOT be paid for surrendering their horse (just as we don't reward people for surrendering cats and dogs). There would be extra benefits as well... Owners could post horses on Craigslist and other sites and not have to worry about the true intentions of the people who show up to see the horse. This would be especially true for people who genuinely can't afford the horse anymore but do care where it ends up. Horses would not be transported long distances and most counties do have animal control facilities. There would less incentive for theft.

                            Why the insistence that they be sent overseas for meat? Oh right, there's no PROFIT to be made in the above solution. And it might require TAXES. Well, my taxes currently support any number of activities I don't believe in. For example, the livestock industry.

                            Comment


                            • Dallas Crowne used to charge 75.00 to take and kill an emaciated horse...
                              Moonover Miss- Many horses are taken to an auction and dropped off with no bio telling about horse's training, or not ridden in. Depending upon weather/advertising, some auctions are not well attended, so KB's buy most. Some people refuse to attend auctions because they are depressing...Kind of like that one in NM with the 4 horses that were down and struggling for a couple of days with no one taking care of them or humanely euthing them. So some people just won't go, even though they might be willing to buy a horse.
                              Some racehorse trainers/owners sell horses straight to kill, rather than attempting to find them a home or contacting the breeder to see if they would like them.
                              Some people run a horse thru an auction with no reserve, not aware that KB's attend/buy there. The local auction here intentionally hides the name of the buyer so people that don't attend regularly wouldn't know their horse just got sold to kill.
                              Some KB's answer CL ads for free or cheap horses and misrepresent what their intentions are for the horse. Some even bring a kid with, so they say it"s for little Susie, then send to slaughter. We have one here that advertises on CL like that.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JSwan View Post
                                You know, there is a reason people take threats seriously. Because once in a while, someone acts on their threat.

                                I guess y'all don't give a damn that AR activists in the UK broke into a kennel, beat a hound to death, and tossed it in the driveway of its Master, after making threats. It's ok as long as it's for "the cause".

                                Regardless of one's position on hot topic issues (horse slaughter being among them), a line is crossed when people threaten to commit an act of violence.

                                Judging by how absolutely crazy some of you act, just on a silly BB, it's apparent that a few are as mentally disturbed as the same folks who make or act on their threats.

                                If one disagrees with horse slaughter - that's fine. If one is active in a ban, that's ok too. Shout out support for a ban, write letters, take an ad in the paper, be active politically. That's all legal, moral, and ethical behavior.

                                But all of you must allow others to engage in the same behavior; and advocate for their position as well.

                                I don't doubt for one second that animal rights activists have tormented the company and its employees. Not for one second. And they've no doubt done it for a long time. At some point those employees are no longer the bad guys. The activists are.

                                Because the activists have crossed the line from advocacy into criminal behavior.

                                I do not excuse what the person did, because he crossed a line too. If he committed a crime, he should be punished. If what he did was legal (but morally and ethically questionable), maybe just let the world see him for the person he is but leave him alone.

                                I feel very strongly about a great many things. I get angry about great injustice and cruelty in this world.

                                What I don't do is call or write the objects of my anger and derision and threaten to kill them or their children.

                                Maybe y'all should think on that a little.

                                Consider that overzealous activism, while understandable, attracts a lot of mentally unhealthy or even unstable people. The internet provides a forum for such people to meet up, to exchange information, and to act out. Often anonymously. Perhaps you think that's ok if it's for a cause you personally believe in or endorse. I don't.

                                Because the person on the receiving end has no way of knowing if the threat is idle or if they're going to wake up in a burning home, or with a dead or missing child or family member, or a dead or missing pet or livestock.

                                Some of you seem so facile and dismissive about the notion of a company or its employees being threatened. Which indicates you may be as sociopathic as the jerk in the video. Think about it.

                                Think about how you would feel and react if people called your home and threatened to harm you or someone or something you cared about. I doubt you'd laugh about it.

                                And for the record - I'm not "scaring" anyone off, and I'm not shouting. Nor am I particularly pro-slaughter. I don't give a rip if a foreign company makes money in the US or not. And I think there are all kinds of ways to solve this problem without selling horses for human consumption. Most large problems do not have a simple solution.

                                But I am not an idiot, and I can discuss this subject intelligently and rationally.

                                What I don't put up with is lies and people who cannot communicate without screeching that I or others brag about slitting horse's throats, or write similar hyperbolic crap that offers nothing of substance.
                                Your my hero! So very well stated! I wish I could express myself so well.
                                Your words are not lost on all.
                                I think it would be wonderful to meet you some day.

                                Comment


                                • Reading without emotion 101:
                                  I would imagine that meant "every animal rights organization" they knew about from in and out of this country has called in threats at one time or another, which is believable.

                                  Not that they meant every individual activist on the planet has called them.

                                  If it's believable that people stating online (from all over the world) that they'd like to beat someone for abusing an animal but they don't actually mean to do that...it's also believable that the person who stated that meant more than a few AR orgs in more than one country has called in threats.

                                  FWIW...
                                  You jump in the saddle,
                                  Hold onto the bridle!
                                  Jump in the line!
                                  ...Belefonte

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                                    Someone I know?
                                    Oh yes, of course... EVERYONE who is against slaughter is a RaRa whack job. So since I am anti-slaughter, I MUST know these people calling this plant with threats. Gotcha'

                                    With that attitude, do you really think I would care that you don't think I am the person you thought I was... whatever that means?
                                    Careful with that broad brush, it can get messy using them.

                                    ETA
                                    On second thought, I thank you for that insulting remark... it tells me that the information I've posted that addresses the actual topic surely must be troublesome and proving my point well for the only recourse to be lumping me with a group I'm not associated with and casting insults.
                                    Sorry Angela but you get as good as you give.
                                    You may not proclaim yourself to be an ARA but your words on these threads make one wonder.

                                    Comment


                                    • As I was saying, the economic impact of live horses is huge:

                                      Economic Impact generated by the New York Equine Industry reached $4.2 billion in 2011, yielding roughly 33,000 full-time equivalent jobs.

                                      State & Local Taxes $187 Million

                                      ECONOMICIMPACT $4,197,623,086
                                      JOBSIMPACT 32,991

                                      RECREATIONDIVISION- DIRECTIMPACTSUMMARY
                                      Total $782,086,443


                                      http://www.nytbreeders.org/pdf/EquineStudy.pdf



                                      MOST COMPREHENSIVE HORSE STUDY EVER REVEALS A
                                      NEARLY $40 BILLION IMPACT ON THE U.S. ECONOMY

                                      by
                                      The American Horse Council
                                      June 28, 2005

                                      The significance of the industry is reflected in the following:

                                      ? The horse industry contributes approximately $39 billion in direct economic impacts to the U.S. economy on an annual basis.

                                      ? Racing, showing and recreation all generate between $10 billion and $12 billion in annual direct impacts.

                                      ? When considering indirect and induced spending, the horse industry annually generates
                                      approximately $102 billion for the U.S. economy.

                                      ? Of the total $102 billion in economic impacts reported, approximately $32.0 billion is generated from the recreational segment, $28.8 billion from the showing segment, $26.1 billion from the racing segment and $14.7 billion for other industry segments.

                                      ? Approximately 1.96 million people own horses, with another 2 million people involved as volunteers or through a family affiliation.

                                      ? The horse industry sustains approximately 1.4 million full-time equivalent jobs on an annual basis, with over 460,000 of those jobs created from the direct spending within the industry.


                                      ? The horse industry pays approximately $1.9 billion in taxes on an annual basis to all levels of government.


                                      This study was commissioned by the American Horse Council Foundation in 2004.

                                      The estimated contribution to the GDP from the U.S. horse industry is approximately $39.2 billion per year.

                                      Table 7 illustrates several key points about the annual operation of the horse industry, including;
                                      ? Contributions of nearly $40 billion to the U.S. GDP.
                                      ? Stimulates approximately $63 billion in indirect and induced impacts.
                                      ? Attracts investments of nearly $25 billion in capital equipment and structures.
                                      ? Creation of over $4.1 billion in taxes and land purchases.


                                      When considering indirect and induced expenditures, the racing, showing and recreational
                                      segments all generate over $26 billion dollars in economic impacts.

                                      Table 10
                                      Direct, Indirect and Induced Effects on
                                      Full-Time Equivalent Employment(1)
                                      TOTAL 1,428,692


                                      In total, approximately $1.9 billion in taxes are paid on an
                                      annual basis by the horse industry to various levels of government.


                                      Jurisdiction Taxes Paid Percent
                                      Federal $588 31.26%
                                      State $1,017 54.12%
                                      Local $275 14.61%
                                      TOTAL $1,880 100.00%
                                      (1) Numbers shown in millions
                                      Table 13
                                      Taxes Paid by Tax Jurisdiction(1)


                                      http://www.manesandtailsorganization...005_Report.pdf



                                      Horse industry significant to Texas economy

                                      Texas

                                      The Texas horse industry has a statewide economic impact of more than $5.2 billion a year, said Clay Cavinder, Ph.D., an assistant professor of equine science at Texas A&M University.

                                      "Horses are valued at $4.2 billion just in the state of Texas," Cavinder said. "In terms of comparison with other industries and their effect on the GDP, we are on the same level as the motion picture industry, apparel manufacturing and tobacco industry. So, the horse industry brings a lot to the table."

                                      http://www.hpj.com/archives/2011/nov...ntUniversi.cfm
                                      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                                      http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Sannois View Post
                                        Sorry Angela but you get as good as you give.
                                        You may not proclaim yourself to be an ARA but your words on these threads make one wonder.
                                        That's your loss then....
                                        Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                                        http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Alagirl View Post


                                          why on earth would you suggest something like that?

                                          It would be like an oil company paying me to take their gas

                                          Actually, it would be like you paying for euthanasia and pick-up by the renderer.

                                          If the demand for horse meat did not exist, no American could make a buck off their equine by selling to a kill buyer.

                                          Business 101.
                                          ************************
                                          \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X