I thought the following discussion of the horse slaughter industry, written by somone heavily involved in the horse rescue industry, was well thought out and would be good food for thought for those following this thread. I was given permission to post it here:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
This was written in response to the legislation
proposed last fall, which does not differ significantly from the current proposed legislation.
The Anti-Slaughter Bill-Food for Thought
Kathleen Schwartz, President
copyright Days End Farm Horse Rescue
As many of you are aware, Federal Legislation is being considered to deal with the issue of slaughtering of unwanted horses. The legislation, in its most recent form, proposes closing slaughtering facilities and directing unwanted horses to horse rescue organizations. Printed below is an editorial written by Kathy Schwartz, Founder and President of Days End
Farm Horse Rescue, speaking to this issue in its most recent form. This article was published in August 2002 issue of The Equiery. We felt compelled to share it with you as part of our newsletter.
Although Days End Farm Horse Rescue agrees in concept with the Anti-Slaughter Bill, we have concerns that the infrastructure is not currently in place to accommodate the long-term implications of the legislation. First though, the requisite disclaimer before offering a discussion of my position is mandated. Allan Schwartz and I have over 13 years of credible and documented experience in the field of horse rescue and rehabilitation. This could not be
accomplished without the much-valued help of our numerous volunteers, partners and supporters whose views may differ with those I have expressed below. We value those people and their views, however, it is incumbent for me to speak out on the issue as a rescue professional and reveal some of the reality of our dealing with unwanted horses over more than the past
decade.
Depending on the source or study cited, there are
anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000 horses commercially
slaughtered each year within the United States. This
statistic is in stark contrast to the only 100 or so
rescues or retirement facilities listed with the
American Horse Protection Association (A.H.P.A.). Each
year, Days End Farm alone cares for approximately 110
horses, virtually all of whom find their way to us by
humane society/animal control impounds or referrals.
In addition, we receive on average at least three
calls daily (1080 yearly) from individuals trying to
place their no longer wanted horses. Despite our
eagerness to take on these additional horses, we are
forced to decline these owners due to our limited
resources. Applying our experience to the other 100
rescues, there are already over 108,000 horses
annually who cannot be accommodated or placed with an
established rescue or retirement facility. The logical
question follows that if rescues cannot accommodate
the existing demand, who will provide adequate care
and shelter for an additional 50,000 to 100,000 more
unwanted horses if this legislation is enacted? Even
if the number of rescues would somehow increase
three-fold before the legislation is passed (an
unlikely event), each rescue would then hove to
accommodate at least an additional 200 to 300 horses a
year. Is this a realistic possibility? Definitely not,
particularly since as a charter board member for
T.A.R.A. (thoroughbred adoption and retirement
association), my experience has been that over
one-third of the literature we circulate to other
rescue facilities as a part of Days End’s continuing
educational training is returned undeliverable
indicating that the rescues are no longer in business.
Compounding the problem is the fact that there are
currently no uniform national guidelines to
authenticate or regulate equine rescue or retirement
organizations. As a result, our fear is if the
anti-slaughter bill should pass, we could see an
increase in hoarders and collectors who despite their
noble intentions, may not be equipped to properly care
and shelter these horses; the unforeseen consequence
will be more abandoned horses. Our fears are not
unfounded, but are corroborated by animal shelter and
humane society professionals who deal with this
problem daily in the context of unwanted cats and
dogs! These humane professionals would also testify as
to the problems of over breeding, notwithstanding
well-funded and well-publicized educational programs
on the issue.
Rapid loss of agricultural land for equestrian use is
yet another concern. More and more farmland is being
lost to urban sprawl and development. Where would all
these horses be housed? Our organization has been
looking for a farm to expand operations for a number
of years, but where will the money come from, even if
an acceptable facility is found? It is not only
developers and the general population as end consumers
who compete for land use. Consider the existing plight
of the Wild Mustangs as an excellent case study.
Already, Federal, State and local governments have
been forced to round up the Mustangs and limit their
natural grazing resulting from pressure from
commercial cattleman and ranchers who consider the
wild horses a competitor for forage. The Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) program, though well
intentioned, is not without controversy.
How about grants from philanthropic foundations as a
resource to deal with the problem? Sounds good!
However, let me share with you the unfortunate reality
of foundation giving for animal causes according to
the Chronicle of Philanthropy, a well-respected
publication in the non-profit world. According to the
February 10, 2000 edition of Chronicle of
Philanthropy, of the billions of funds donated each
year, only 6% is given to Environment and Animals, and
of that 6%, a mere .09% is given to animal related
causes, with the most going to dog and cat related
charities. This clearly leaves little foundation
monies available to existing horse rescues.How about
gifts and donations from the general public as a
resource to deal with the problem? Well, and to be
quite frank, it is shocking to me that very few horse
organizations and clubs who hold benefits or other
charitable events designate horse-related charities as
their benefactor, but instead designate other
charities (albeit worthwhile causes) as the recipient
of funds raised! Further, a report called The State of
Giving in Maryland 2001, conducted by the Association
of Baltimore Area Grantmakers and the Baltimore Giving
Project, revealed that Maryland funders gave grants
totaling $98 million dollars; animals in general fell
in the less than 1% category. It also stated that
although Maryland is ranked the fifth wealthiest state
in the United States, it is ranked 44th on the
Generosity Index.
Clearly, the business of rescuing and rehabilitating
unwanted horses is an expensive proposition, even for
non-profit and charitable organizations such as Days
End. By our figures, each horse we shelter costs $500
per month on average for each of the first three
months alone due to vet, farrier, dental visits plus
worming and feeding, medications, stall care and
special care needed by staff. This number does not
factor in the value of donated man-hours and in-kind
goods from our volunteers and corporate partners.
After three months, that number is reduced to $250
monthly until the horse is adopted to a qualified and
caring owner, a process which takes on average 6 to 9
months. If the horse is not rideable or has medical
limitations, finding a willing and qualified applicant
takes even longer. Where is the money going to come
from? Do we honestly believe the federal government is
or should be willing or able to free the funds
necessary to handle this massive problem?
The Slaughter Prevention Act states that any animals
that cannot be placed will be humanely euthanized by a
veterinarian. I would be remiss if I did not point out
the irony that a veterinarian’s first oath is to do no
harm yet this legislation in its current form would
expect a vet to violate that oath and euthanize
otherwise healthy horses. Is that fair to ask of these
professionals, most of whom I have encountered
genuinely care about the animals they treat. Even if a
vet would add the euthanization of horses for
commercial purposes to his resume, how then will the
problem of carcass removal be addressed? Have
appropriate studies been conducted to consider how
this will affect the rendering plants and/or
individual property owners? What too about this issue.
50 Years ago virtually everyone boarded their horses
on their own property. With continuing land
development, a large percentage of horses today are
boarded on other people’s property, what then? The
other means of disposal is cremation, which can be
very expensive when done commercially; if done at the
State labs, the labs would soon be overwhelmed. The
problem is clearly exponential!
Consider too what happens to horses sent by their
owners to slaughter for human consumption. While
Canada and the United States have an understanding,
there is no such understanding with Mexico. If
slaughterhouse operations in the US and Canada are
suspect in terms of their humane treatment of the
animals, it is difficult to conceive the atrocities
that no doubt occur in slaughter plants in less
affluent developing nations. We have heard stated that
California passed an anti-slaughter law and when
polled, the state prosecutors agreed that they saw no
increase in horse cruelty cases. This statement does
really not surprise me and we believe that the
statement to be true, as far as it goes. However, here
is the rest of the story. If California is like
Maryland, animal control and humane agencies are
responsible for investigating cases of abuse and
neglect of horses. In Maryland, several jurisdictions
investigate cat and dog cruelty cases only. Those that
do investigate horse cruelty are often hard pressed to
track statistics on numbers of horse cruelty cases
since horses are classified under the category of
other livestock. Even fewer horse abuse cases have
actually ever gone to court. Why? Animal abuse in
Maryland is currently a misdemeanor offense unless it
can be proven that the person INTENTIONALLY mutilates
or cruelly kills an animal. Then, upon recent ruling,
it is considered a felony. Unless the case is severe
in circumstance and the owner is not willing to give
up the horses in question, abusive or grossly
neglectful owners are rarely prosecuted. The courts
are already overburdened with felony cases. There is
little if no incentive for prosecutors to increase
prosecution on animal cruelty cases in a system
already stretched so thin in its resources.
Further complicating the issue is the unfortunate fact
that we live in a throwaway society. When something
breaks we get rid of it and buy another. In most cases
it is easier, quicker and more cost effective.
Unfortunately in a lot of cases, some people think of
horses in the same manner. It costs about $150 to
euthanise a horse and approximately $150 to have the
renderers pick the horse up. If the horse breaks down
and con no longer perform on the same level, they
purchase a new one. If owners take their horse to the
sale for slaughter, they may receive as much as $500
for the horse and can use that towards the purchase of
the next horse. So given to option, pay $300 or
receive $500, some owners view the decision strictly
in terms of economics and choose to slaughter.
The bottom line is that although Days End Farm Horse Rescue applauds the intent of legislators and supporters of the anti-slaughter bill, we appreciate all too greatly what will happen to horses if adequate resources are not put into place to deal with the influx of the unwanted animals before legislation is enacted. We too would like to see he end of the slaughter houses as a resource to eliminate unwanted horses, but we are all too familiar with having to reject animals because of financial, land or human resources limitations. We continue in our mission of saving those horses we can. Our experience warns of the reality that there is much to be accomplished to create and financially support other sheltering alternatives for these un wanted horses before the slaughterhouses can be realistically closed. This is a long-term problem, which require forward, balanced and long-term thinking and financial planning. We are proud to be supporters of a good first step demonstrated in the Transportation of Horses to Slaughter Act; however, much remains to be done to establish a more humane society equipped to handle the long terms effects of the Anti-Slaughter Bill.
Copyright Days End Farm Horse Rescue
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
-----
*Preparation is one of the natural aids.*
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
This was written in response to the legislation
proposed last fall, which does not differ significantly from the current proposed legislation.
The Anti-Slaughter Bill-Food for Thought
Kathleen Schwartz, President
copyright Days End Farm Horse Rescue
As many of you are aware, Federal Legislation is being considered to deal with the issue of slaughtering of unwanted horses. The legislation, in its most recent form, proposes closing slaughtering facilities and directing unwanted horses to horse rescue organizations. Printed below is an editorial written by Kathy Schwartz, Founder and President of Days End
Farm Horse Rescue, speaking to this issue in its most recent form. This article was published in August 2002 issue of The Equiery. We felt compelled to share it with you as part of our newsletter.
Although Days End Farm Horse Rescue agrees in concept with the Anti-Slaughter Bill, we have concerns that the infrastructure is not currently in place to accommodate the long-term implications of the legislation. First though, the requisite disclaimer before offering a discussion of my position is mandated. Allan Schwartz and I have over 13 years of credible and documented experience in the field of horse rescue and rehabilitation. This could not be
accomplished without the much-valued help of our numerous volunteers, partners and supporters whose views may differ with those I have expressed below. We value those people and their views, however, it is incumbent for me to speak out on the issue as a rescue professional and reveal some of the reality of our dealing with unwanted horses over more than the past
decade.
Depending on the source or study cited, there are
anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000 horses commercially
slaughtered each year within the United States. This
statistic is in stark contrast to the only 100 or so
rescues or retirement facilities listed with the
American Horse Protection Association (A.H.P.A.). Each
year, Days End Farm alone cares for approximately 110
horses, virtually all of whom find their way to us by
humane society/animal control impounds or referrals.
In addition, we receive on average at least three
calls daily (1080 yearly) from individuals trying to
place their no longer wanted horses. Despite our
eagerness to take on these additional horses, we are
forced to decline these owners due to our limited
resources. Applying our experience to the other 100
rescues, there are already over 108,000 horses
annually who cannot be accommodated or placed with an
established rescue or retirement facility. The logical
question follows that if rescues cannot accommodate
the existing demand, who will provide adequate care
and shelter for an additional 50,000 to 100,000 more
unwanted horses if this legislation is enacted? Even
if the number of rescues would somehow increase
three-fold before the legislation is passed (an
unlikely event), each rescue would then hove to
accommodate at least an additional 200 to 300 horses a
year. Is this a realistic possibility? Definitely not,
particularly since as a charter board member for
T.A.R.A. (thoroughbred adoption and retirement
association), my experience has been that over
one-third of the literature we circulate to other
rescue facilities as a part of Days End’s continuing
educational training is returned undeliverable
indicating that the rescues are no longer in business.
Compounding the problem is the fact that there are
currently no uniform national guidelines to
authenticate or regulate equine rescue or retirement
organizations. As a result, our fear is if the
anti-slaughter bill should pass, we could see an
increase in hoarders and collectors who despite their
noble intentions, may not be equipped to properly care
and shelter these horses; the unforeseen consequence
will be more abandoned horses. Our fears are not
unfounded, but are corroborated by animal shelter and
humane society professionals who deal with this
problem daily in the context of unwanted cats and
dogs! These humane professionals would also testify as
to the problems of over breeding, notwithstanding
well-funded and well-publicized educational programs
on the issue.
Rapid loss of agricultural land for equestrian use is
yet another concern. More and more farmland is being
lost to urban sprawl and development. Where would all
these horses be housed? Our organization has been
looking for a farm to expand operations for a number
of years, but where will the money come from, even if
an acceptable facility is found? It is not only
developers and the general population as end consumers
who compete for land use. Consider the existing plight
of the Wild Mustangs as an excellent case study.
Already, Federal, State and local governments have
been forced to round up the Mustangs and limit their
natural grazing resulting from pressure from
commercial cattleman and ranchers who consider the
wild horses a competitor for forage. The Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) program, though well
intentioned, is not without controversy.
How about grants from philanthropic foundations as a
resource to deal with the problem? Sounds good!
However, let me share with you the unfortunate reality
of foundation giving for animal causes according to
the Chronicle of Philanthropy, a well-respected
publication in the non-profit world. According to the
February 10, 2000 edition of Chronicle of
Philanthropy, of the billions of funds donated each
year, only 6% is given to Environment and Animals, and
of that 6%, a mere .09% is given to animal related
causes, with the most going to dog and cat related
charities. This clearly leaves little foundation
monies available to existing horse rescues.How about
gifts and donations from the general public as a
resource to deal with the problem? Well, and to be
quite frank, it is shocking to me that very few horse
organizations and clubs who hold benefits or other
charitable events designate horse-related charities as
their benefactor, but instead designate other
charities (albeit worthwhile causes) as the recipient
of funds raised! Further, a report called The State of
Giving in Maryland 2001, conducted by the Association
of Baltimore Area Grantmakers and the Baltimore Giving
Project, revealed that Maryland funders gave grants
totaling $98 million dollars; animals in general fell
in the less than 1% category. It also stated that
although Maryland is ranked the fifth wealthiest state
in the United States, it is ranked 44th on the
Generosity Index.
Clearly, the business of rescuing and rehabilitating
unwanted horses is an expensive proposition, even for
non-profit and charitable organizations such as Days
End. By our figures, each horse we shelter costs $500
per month on average for each of the first three
months alone due to vet, farrier, dental visits plus
worming and feeding, medications, stall care and
special care needed by staff. This number does not
factor in the value of donated man-hours and in-kind
goods from our volunteers and corporate partners.
After three months, that number is reduced to $250
monthly until the horse is adopted to a qualified and
caring owner, a process which takes on average 6 to 9
months. If the horse is not rideable or has medical
limitations, finding a willing and qualified applicant
takes even longer. Where is the money going to come
from? Do we honestly believe the federal government is
or should be willing or able to free the funds
necessary to handle this massive problem?
The Slaughter Prevention Act states that any animals
that cannot be placed will be humanely euthanized by a
veterinarian. I would be remiss if I did not point out
the irony that a veterinarian’s first oath is to do no
harm yet this legislation in its current form would
expect a vet to violate that oath and euthanize
otherwise healthy horses. Is that fair to ask of these
professionals, most of whom I have encountered
genuinely care about the animals they treat. Even if a
vet would add the euthanization of horses for
commercial purposes to his resume, how then will the
problem of carcass removal be addressed? Have
appropriate studies been conducted to consider how
this will affect the rendering plants and/or
individual property owners? What too about this issue.
50 Years ago virtually everyone boarded their horses
on their own property. With continuing land
development, a large percentage of horses today are
boarded on other people’s property, what then? The
other means of disposal is cremation, which can be
very expensive when done commercially; if done at the
State labs, the labs would soon be overwhelmed. The
problem is clearly exponential!
Consider too what happens to horses sent by their
owners to slaughter for human consumption. While
Canada and the United States have an understanding,
there is no such understanding with Mexico. If
slaughterhouse operations in the US and Canada are
suspect in terms of their humane treatment of the
animals, it is difficult to conceive the atrocities
that no doubt occur in slaughter plants in less
affluent developing nations. We have heard stated that
California passed an anti-slaughter law and when
polled, the state prosecutors agreed that they saw no
increase in horse cruelty cases. This statement does
really not surprise me and we believe that the
statement to be true, as far as it goes. However, here
is the rest of the story. If California is like
Maryland, animal control and humane agencies are
responsible for investigating cases of abuse and
neglect of horses. In Maryland, several jurisdictions
investigate cat and dog cruelty cases only. Those that
do investigate horse cruelty are often hard pressed to
track statistics on numbers of horse cruelty cases
since horses are classified under the category of
other livestock. Even fewer horse abuse cases have
actually ever gone to court. Why? Animal abuse in
Maryland is currently a misdemeanor offense unless it
can be proven that the person INTENTIONALLY mutilates
or cruelly kills an animal. Then, upon recent ruling,
it is considered a felony. Unless the case is severe
in circumstance and the owner is not willing to give
up the horses in question, abusive or grossly
neglectful owners are rarely prosecuted. The courts
are already overburdened with felony cases. There is
little if no incentive for prosecutors to increase
prosecution on animal cruelty cases in a system
already stretched so thin in its resources.
Further complicating the issue is the unfortunate fact
that we live in a throwaway society. When something
breaks we get rid of it and buy another. In most cases
it is easier, quicker and more cost effective.
Unfortunately in a lot of cases, some people think of
horses in the same manner. It costs about $150 to
euthanise a horse and approximately $150 to have the
renderers pick the horse up. If the horse breaks down
and con no longer perform on the same level, they
purchase a new one. If owners take their horse to the
sale for slaughter, they may receive as much as $500
for the horse and can use that towards the purchase of
the next horse. So given to option, pay $300 or
receive $500, some owners view the decision strictly
in terms of economics and choose to slaughter.
The bottom line is that although Days End Farm Horse Rescue applauds the intent of legislators and supporters of the anti-slaughter bill, we appreciate all too greatly what will happen to horses if adequate resources are not put into place to deal with the influx of the unwanted animals before legislation is enacted. We too would like to see he end of the slaughter houses as a resource to eliminate unwanted horses, but we are all too familiar with having to reject animals because of financial, land or human resources limitations. We continue in our mission of saving those horses we can. Our experience warns of the reality that there is much to be accomplished to create and financially support other sheltering alternatives for these un wanted horses before the slaughterhouses can be realistically closed. This is a long-term problem, which require forward, balanced and long-term thinking and financial planning. We are proud to be supporters of a good first step demonstrated in the Transportation of Horses to Slaughter Act; however, much remains to be done to establish a more humane society equipped to handle the long terms effects of the Anti-Slaughter Bill.
Copyright Days End Farm Horse Rescue
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
-----
*Preparation is one of the natural aids.*
. 
, but that's ok w/ me). Also some horses that have been sold will go to good homes, but not all. So if anyone wants to sell for whatever reason, go ahead, just don't bemoan the consequences of your actions.
My nieces are sooooo hip.
(The Vet still talks about that one.....)
Comment