• 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 newhorsemommy View Post
    Well I just posted two possible solutions. Free or low cost euthanasia clinics and/or providing funding to county animal shelters to accept horses and provide euthanasia after a short holding period. It's not even hard to come up with other ideas. The lack of follow-through on alternatives strikes me as evidence of both the laziness I mentioned earlier and that the current efforts to re-open the slaughter houses are about money, and NOTHING else.
    If they are euthanized, aren't they just as dead? This is what I find silly. Euthanasia = fine, but "slaughter" is bad? Using the carcass for a purpose is bad? If done correctly, a bullet is quite humane. I don't think anyone here has said that horse in the video suffered. I know of more than one vet or rescue group that euthanizes by gunshot because they believe it is more humane.

    Earlier this year, I watched the behavior of the horses in my herd as they watched the farm slaughter process of some other animals (not horses). They were curious, they watched, they were not scared by the rifle shots, they were not upset as the carcasses were hoisted, skinned and cut up, they mostly just wanted to know if they could have some of the leftover hay in the pen where it happened.

    The guy is a jerk, no doubt about it. If he had a cause, it certainly hurt more than helped. I have read that the video was shot over a year ago and has just recently surfaced because AR people decided to use it at this time.

    Comment


    • Conversely the cost of a plant to a town and local economy is quite significant:



      But news that horse slaughter plants may be returning to the U.S in 2012 has Bacon speaking out about what one horse slaughter plant with 46 non-unionized employees can do to a small town of 6,700 hard-working people.
      [Yup quite a big employer those plants!]
      Five million dollars in federal funding was spent*annually to support three foreign-owned horse slaughter plants:*Dallas Crown, Beltex in Fort Worth and Cavel in DeKalb, Illinois,” claims Bacon. “When Dallas Crown’s tax records came to light in the city’s legal struggle, we found they’d paid only $5 in federal taxes on a gross income of over $12 million.

      Over one six-week period, Kaufman issued 29 citations for wastewater violations, each accompanied by a potential fine of $2,000. Dallas Crown responded by requesting 29 separate jury trials, potentially causing yet another economic strain on the city’s budget.

      Kaufman could not afford to litigate in order to collect the fines, which went unpaid. “But things got a lot worse,” says Bacon. During a 19-month period in 2004–2005, there were 481 violations, at which point Dallas Crown refused entry to Kaufman’s engineers, preventing them from doing any environmental tests for nine months.

      Mayor Holcomb stated, “That plant has never made the city a dime and never will,” then relented, believing the town could close Dallas Crown if it failed to comply with ordinances and regulations. And Dallas Crown quickly agreed to meet the city’s requirements.

      Other promises followed. “We don’t go on the market to get ‘good’ horses. We get surplus horses—those that would be sent to the glue factory or others not fit for other use,” said plant manager Serruys. Estimates of horses slaughtered per week: 300.

      The waste water analyst at that critical, 1986 city council meeting omitted two key details that would prove disastrous for Kaufman over the next two decades. The first had to do with the quantities of horse blood that Dallas Crown would produce. The second was its marketability to fertilizer companies.
      Quite simply, the companies didn’t want it for the same reason that a major U.S. prepared-foods company later stopped fertilizing its mushrooms with horse manure: drugs in the horses’ systems that were toxic to humans.

      Even if the horses had been old and useless, their ages should have disqualified them as slaughter animals or at least raised a flag: No rancher keeps a meat animal beyond the age it takes to reach full weight. A horse past that age would obviously have done something else prior to being sold to a kill buyer: breeding stock, racehorse, sport horse or working animal, for example.

      But these kinds of equines get medicated with wormers, antibiotics, fly sprays, diuretics and Phenylbutazone, a pain killer once administered to people and now banned as a known human carcinogen by the USDA and FDA in slaughter-bound food animals.

      As a result, the fertilizer companies rejected the horses’ blood as too toxic for commercial use. And so, shortly after going online again in the springtime, Dallas Crown—and Kaufman’s sewer system—was again awash in horse blood, a disaster compounded by another key detail that the waste water specialist should have known: 300 horses produce blood equivalent to 600 cows. Twice the amount of blood, more than twice the toxicity, for half the profit.


      http://www.forbes.com/sites/vickerye...cks-some-tail/
      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

      Comment


      • Originally posted by sunny59 View Post
        If they are euthanized, aren't they just as dead? This is what I find silly. Euthanasia = fine, but "slaughter" is bad? Using the carcass for a purpose is bad? If done correctly, a bullet is quite humane. I don't think anyone here has said that horse in the video suffered. I know of more than one vet or rescue group that euthanizes by gunshot because they believe it is more humane.

        Earlier this year, I watched the behavior of the horses in my herd as they watched the farm slaughter process of some other animals (not horses). They were curious, they watched, they were not scared by the rifle shots, they were not upset as the carcasses were hoisted, skinned and cut up, they mostly just wanted to know if they could have some of the leftover hay in the pen where it happened.

        The guy is a jerk, no doubt about it. If he had a cause, it certainly hurt more than helped. I have read that the video was shot over a year ago and has just recently surfaced because AR people decided to use it at this time.
        Really, I read that it just came to light cause there are several recent, local articles out there stating this guy was a buyer for Valley Meats... and with his name out there in the media the video, that he posted with his name on it, was noticed.

        I guess it depends on who you're listening to, what you 'hear'
        Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
          So you think that it makes sense to ban horse slaughter, just because some of the richest non-profit animal rights groups say it is not done right?
          I apologise if my post was not clear - I cannot support slaughter because I do not like the current method. Refusing to support something because you do not agree with the chosen method makes perfect sense to me. Nothing to do with animal rights groups.

          Remember, these discussions are not about how to make slaughter better, but about if to BAN slaughter or not.
          Don't let the well used and abused "abuse card" muddle the real issue here.
          We may be talking at cross purposes here then. I simply saw this as a place to state my opinion about the video in the original post (ignoring his crap attitude and focusing just on using a gunshot to euth a horse, then presumably processing the horse for personal use) and how I can be completely supportive of this, but not of horse slaughter en masse as it was/is.

          I assumed my explanation would be sufficient to explain why I don't view the topic as simply "pro-slaughter vs. ban-slaughter", but I guess that's what I get for assuming and not takign the time to write things out.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by EKLay View Post
            I apologise if my post was not clear - I cannot support slaughter because I do not like the current method. Refusing to support something because you do not agree with the chosen method makes perfect sense to me. Nothing to do with animal rights groups.


            We may be talking at cross purposes here then. I simply saw this as a place to state my opinion about the video in the original post (ignoring his crap attitude and focusing just on using a gunshot to euth a horse, then presumably processing the horse for personal use) and how I can be completely supportive of this, but not of horse slaughter en masse as it was/is.

            I assumed my explanation would be sufficient to explain why I don't view the topic as simply "pro-slaughter vs. ban-slaughter", but I guess that's what I get for assuming and not takign the time to write things out.
            There is much in life I don't support, but I don't go asking for bans because I don't like or support it or think it is stupid or wasteful or poorly run or ... or ... or ...

            Others have rights too, you know and if they want to have a place to slaughter their horses for sale to martians, why not?

            Comment


            • You know, you're really overreacting and being hysterical. As well as being overly sensitive.

              What I wrote was, PERHAPS it is someone you know. I did not say you were complicit or aware. PERHAPS someone I know has made threats against animal rights activists. It is POSSIBLE, though I may not be aware of it. I certainly would never approve of it and I wouldn't knowingly associate with such people.

              You completely ignored everything else I wrote. Completely. You also stated that the person who uttered the figurative remark is part of a "side". He isn't. He's a law enforcement officer who was interviewed. He may or may not have a personal opinion on the matter. I don't know.

              And actually, neither do you.

              I do not always agree with you, but you seem to want people to believe you are an authority on this subject. Yet you were not aware of something as basic as HAACP. When I told you about it and offered a reasonable option for disposal of unwanted horses (not for human consumption) what I got in return was - silence. You apparently rejected an opportunity to engage in a technical discussion with someone who knows a great deal about this area of policy, law and regulation. Which is ok - but you lost the right to complain that the other "side" isn't engaging. (not that I represent any side)

              I don't think some of you are actually interested in real world, real life solutions or honest discourse or an exchange of ideas. These threads seem to be used primarily to screech at people when they don't agree with your worldview. (NB - see how I am, yet again, not "lumping" people together?)

              Do more reasonable people a favor and let us know your intention ahead of time so we don't waste time responding.

              As far as acting hurt that you've been insulted - read again. No one insulted you. No one even implied an insult. I certainly didn't, nor did I intend one.

              I notice you did not reject the idea of threatening violence against those employees or company. You did not actually respond to what I wrote. Interesting.

              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.
              Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
              Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
              -Rudyard Kipling

              Comment

              • Original Poster

                But they don't use a bullet for slaughter. And it's being done for profit, which means making every effort to maximize that profit, which lessons the chance that it will be done in a humane fashion.

                Comment


                • So I waited until after the urge to shove a gun up that fellow's rectum and perform some much needed brain surgery had passed before responding - aren't y'all glad I waited till I could compose a reasoned reply?

                  Anyway, here's the problem I guess I have with horse slaughter vs. other livestock slaughter. My friends who raise sheep find a small cold storage plant/slaughterhouse that has methods they approve of, and they take their sheep there every year. My friends who raise cattle do the same. Because they know that's where most of their animals - or at least their culls or ram lambs or whatever - will end up.

                  But nobody raises horses for food, do they, knowing the cold storage is the ultimate end for all of them? No, they don't. It seems to me somehow that the "sale" or the auction or the KB is the chickenshite way out for those who neither know nor care about how their animal is handled so long as they get a few dollars and a fantasy about how somebody probably gave old Dobbin a nice home. And I hate a coward more than just about anything (except a poisoner).
                  I'm not ignoring the rules. I'm interpreting the rules. Tamal, The Great British Baking Show

                  Comment


                  • Who said they did.

                    I ask you, jetsmom. How do you know for certain they are not valid threats? What special powers of perception do you have that you can discern valid or invalid threats from the comfort of your home?

                    Law enforcement does have to take threats seriously. People who have been threatened have absolutely no way of knowing which threat is serious or not.

                    And you know that. I know you know that.

                    What I referenced was not people on a BB writing something in anger (I've done it too after reading about animal abuse, for example)

                    I was referencing the threats being made to the company and its employees. Someone is tracking down employees, obtaining their contact information, and threatening them personally.

                    That's sick. And a person has every right to fear and resent that type of harassment and intimidation. It's NEVER appropriate and you know it isn't. At least I hope you do.

                    Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
                    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.
                    Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                    Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                    -Rudyard Kipling

                    Comment


                    • JSwan, there was an HSUS follower posting on COTH that did state clearly that the world would be better off without humans, so no one would abuse an animal.

                      Can't really debate with such mindset.

                      Comment


                      • THIS I don't think some of you are actually interested in real world, real life solutions or honest discourse or an exchange of ideas. These threads seem to be used primarily to screech at people when they don't agree with your worldview. (NB - see how I am, yet again, not "lumping"

                        I wasmulling over the idea of going back and bumping all the slaughter thread in just the last year and highlighting all the same comments from all the same cast of characters, but I figured it would make the mods nuts. I am still convinced these threads occur and grow more rabid when a full moon is near.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                          There is much in life I don't support, but I don't go asking for bans because I don't like or support it or think it is stupid or wasteful or poorly run or ... or ... or ...

                          Others have rights too, you know and if they want to have a place to slaughter their horses for sale to martians, why not?
                          I don't want to ban slaughter itself though, that was my point. I absolutely support humane, respectful slaughter and utilization of the carcass of whatever type of animal anyone wants to use.

                          I just think that big companies/facilities can too easily start to cut corners in order to get more profit and that's where the problem is. I don't believe all the sensationalist crap about slaughter houses being hotbeds of mayhem, torture, etc, but neither do I believe all the stories that everything was perfect and worked just fine either.

                          Comment


                          • I don't know that it's the chicken shite way out. Not generally. It can be, certainly. An auction is a place where you can buy and sell horses, and folks can find a good riding horse there. Yes, even at NH.

                            But I think it can be an expedient. Go in, drop them off, and done. Home in time for dinner. I don't think of it as cowardly; unless the motivation of a person is to avoid any guilt or personal responsibility. (you know the old saw about Dad who tells the kids Fido went to live on a farm in the country; but the truth is Mom got tired of the dog hair on the sofa and took him to the shelter to be gassed)
                            On the one hand, at least there was a shelter to take the dog to, even if the dog had to die.

                            On the other hand, if the owner was determined to get rid of it, and there was no way to divest ownership or find another home... would the dog's fate have been worse?

                            I'm not compared a slaughterhouse to a shelter. Except that they both serve as endpoints for animals with no owner. There was a time when no shelters existed in this country; and pets suffered very cruel fates (many still do). So we created a shelter system and we're still killing millions of pets annually; even with all the money spent on education, breeding restrictions, licensing, spay/neuter, more education, more taxpayer and donor money, more more more more more. And still, pets die.

                            I see the same thing happening with horses. The same solutions proposed that have already been implemented with pets and largely failed or cost many millions of dollars to produce modest results.

                            That isn't an argument to continue horse slaughter. But when policy makers are faced with the numbers, and someone offers to take the problem off our hands and also pump money into the economy - policymakers listen.



                            Originally posted by pAin't_Misbehavin' View Post
                            But nobody raises horses for food, do they, knowing the cold storage is the ultimate end for all of them? No, they don't. It seems to me somehow that the "sale" or the auction or the KB is the chickenshite way out for those who neither know nor care about how their animal is handled so long as they get a few dollars and a fantasy about how somebody probably gave old Dobbin a nice home. And I hate a coward more than just about anything (except a poisoner).
                            Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                            Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                            -Rudyard Kipling

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                              JSwan, there was an HSUS follower posting on COTH that did state clearly that the world would be better off without humans, so no one would abuse an animal.

                              Can't really debate with such mindset.
                              Yup between that and PETA who's chief CEO Ingrid somebody, that she really did not like animals, she felt people should not be allowed to keep them as pets. And there should be ZERO population growth.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by pAin't_Misbehavin' View Post
                                So I waited until after the urge to shove a gun up that fellow's rectum and perform some much needed brain surgery had passed before responding - aren't y'all glad I waited till I could compose a reasoned reply?

                                Anyway, here's the problem I guess I have with horse slaughter vs. other livestock slaughter. My friends who raise sheep find a small cold storage plant/slaughterhouse that has methods they approve of, and they take their sheep there every year. My friends who raise cattle do the same. Because they know that's where most of their animals - or at least their culls or ram lambs or whatever - will end up.

                                But nobody raises horses for food, do they, knowing the cold storage is the ultimate end for all of them? No, they don't. It seems to me somehow that the "sale" or the auction or the KB is the chickenshite way out for those who neither know nor care about how their animal is handled so long as they get a few dollars and a fantasy about how somebody probably gave old Dobbin a nice home. And I hate a coward more than just about anything (except a poisoner).
                                Not in the US they do not but someone correct me if I am wrong, They do raise them for slaughter in some countries? Belgium comes to mind?

                                Comment


                                • so I have a question. If transport to slaughter was banned and equine slaughterhouses were not around would that not essentially bog down the horse market? Would that not make breeders stop breeding because nothing is selling? I know in the mean time horses would starve, be turned loose to fend for themselves, yadda yadda etc etc but after a while would'nt breeders be forced to stop breeding because the market would be so stagnant? I am neither for nor against slaughter at this moment. If they chose a better way to transport the horses, found a way to make sure the meat was quality meat, found a way to better slaughter the animal, make sure it was not someones beloved stolen pet and make sure it did not wind up hidden in other meats than yes I would agree for it. I worry that this meat will find its way in our meat supply, I mean large beef farms do feed feeds that have animal remains in them, proven fact. A horse to me gets far more drugs than a cow any day. So what if?


                                  oh and with this whole sequestration BS, the usda is looking at cutting some of their employees so who is going to inspect these plants to ensure our meat is being slaughtered as humanely as possible and makes sure its going to its proper destination instead of our plates? see nobody is working anything out. They are tossing out the tangled yarn ball to the pretty kitten and hoping the kitten can untangle it for them.

                                  Comment

                                  • Original Poster

                                    Originally posted by pAin't_Misbehavin' View Post
                                    So I waited until after the urge to shove a gun up that fellow's rectum and perform some much needed brain surgery had passed before responding - aren't y'all glad I waited till I could compose a reasoned reply?

                                    Anyway, here's the problem I guess I have with horse slaughter vs. other livestock slaughter. My friends who raise sheep find a small cold storage plant/slaughterhouse that has methods they approve of, and they take their sheep there every year. My friends who raise cattle do the same. Because they know that's where most of their animals - or at least their culls or ram lambs or whatever - will end up.

                                    But nobody raises horses for food, do they, knowing the cold storage is the ultimate end for all of them? No, they don't. It seems to me somehow that the "sale" or the auction or the KB is the chickenshite way out for those who neither know nor care about how their animal is handled so long as they get a few dollars and a fantasy about how somebody probably gave old Dobbin a nice home. And I hate a coward more than just about anything (except a poisoner).
                                    Agreed. And maybe that's my fundamental issue with it. We are not raising horses for meat. A good percentage of horses that end up at slaughter were once someone's pet or animal companion (or whatever term you prefer).

                                    And it's not like we are feeding the hungry with horse meat. A small number of people will make a good deal of profit sending the meat overseas as an expensive delicacy.

                                    I'm a vegetarian because I think it's cowardly (not quite the word I have in mind) to eat something I am unwilling to kill myself. I think it's cowardly to dump your horse at auction and pretend it found a home. And it think it's cowardly to disguise a commercial endeavor as some kind of charitable act.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by newhorsemommy View Post
                                      Agreed. And maybe that's my fundamental issue with it. We are not raising horses for meat. A good percentage of horses that end up at slaughter were once someone's pet or animal companion (or whatever term you prefer).

                                      And it's not like we are feeding the hungry with horse meat. A small number of people will make a good deal of profit sending the meat overseas as an expensive delicacy.

                                      I'm a vegetarian because I think it's cowardly (not quite the word I have in mind) to eat something I am unwilling to kill myself. I think it's cowardly to dump your horse at auction and pretend it found a home. And it think it's cowardly to disguise a commercial endeavor as some kind of charitable act.
                                      And on that note we have slipped into the 7th circle of hell!

                                      SERIOUSLY? Cowardly to eat something you could not kill yourself?
                                      NO wonder you started this thread.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by sunny59 View Post
                                        If they are euthanized, aren't they just as dead? This is what I find silly. Euthanasia = fine, but "slaughter" is bad? Using the carcass for a purpose is bad? If done correctly, a bullet is quite humane. I don't think anyone here has said that horse in the video suffered. I know of more than one vet or rescue group that euthanizes by gunshot because they believe it is more humane.

                                        Earlier this year, I watched the behavior of the horses in my herd as they watched the farm slaughter process of some other animals (not horses). They were curious, they watched, they were not scared by the rifle shots, they were not upset as the carcasses were hoisted, skinned and cut up, they mostly just wanted to know if they could have some of the leftover hay in the pen where it happened.

                                        The guy is a jerk, no doubt about it. If he had a cause, it certainly hurt more than helped. I have read that the video was shot over a year ago and has just recently surfaced because AR people decided to use it at this time.
                                        I don't know of anyone that has a problem with using a horse's body after it's dead. Most have no problem with euth by gunshot. Most have no problem with people euthing by gunshot and eating their own horse. What the majority of anti commercial horse slaughter for human consumption have a problem with is the entire process of multiple auctions, deception to attain horses (from KB's lying to people about intent of getting a free horse on CL, to auctions hiding the fact that KB's are buying at their auction to falsifying EIDs/coggins), to the crowded transport over long distances with no food/water, no vet care when injured at auction or feedlot or transport, feedlot conditions, dumping horses rejected at the border in the desert, no enforcement for cruelty/neglect laws because "it's going to slaughter anyways, inadequate humane handling in SH's, lack of oversight in Sh's, failure of Livestock inspectors to act when they see blatant cruelty at auctions like in NM/Sugarcreek, failure of mgrs. at SH's to act when they see humane handling violations at SH (several videos out there showing this), putting profit/speed over humane handling at SH's resulting in more misses/inadequate stunning, etc.

                                        The video just surfaced because Sappington's daughter just recently posted it online.

                                        Comment


                                        • For those of you who say it wont be consumed in the US. Here is a charming website with links to the USDA promoting how great horse meat is.
                                          http://www.eathorse.com/

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X