• 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

***READ THIS- PRO SLAUGHTER ARTICLE***

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

  • ***READ THIS- PRO SLAUGHTER ARTICLE***

    Maybe I read this wrong, but it smells like pro-slaughter to me, in the name of the almighty dollar.
    http://www.thehorse.com/viewarticle.aspx?ID=7074
    SPAY/NEUTER/RESCUE/ADOPT!
    Little Star Chihuahua Rescue
    The Barkalicious Bakery
    On Facebook!!!

  • #2
    I saw this. I think it is incredibly one sided.

    We are talking about only 1% of the equine population needing to be absorbed back into the equine community, rather than slaughtered. I would be ashamed of my bretheren horse-lovers if that percentage of horses is not something we could/would not all step-up to help and take care of.

    The idea that an excuse to keep slaughter legal is so that those who can not afford to provide end of life care to the horses they own is also incredibly impalateable to me. Every horse owner should have an emergency fund for the situation where the horse is no longer viable. Whether this means simply having a bank account or credit card expressly set up with funds for euthenasia, I think it's the least we can offer a companion who does so much for us. I think it boils down to responsability... which imo you accept fully when you purchase a horse (or dog, cat, etc... or have a child)
    Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

    Comment


    • #3
      I am shocked that The Horse would run an article like this. Not so shocked however, that 4 of the 9 contributors were from Texas, home of two of the three US plants.

      Things like, "If United States policy were to forbid selling to food commerce, there may be potential political ramifications," is IMHO ridiculous.

      They do not address the fact that when people learn they cannot make a last buck off of their unwanted horses by sending them to slaughter, they may actually euthanize them humanely and/or become more selective about indiscriminate breeding.
      "There's something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man" ~ Sir Winston Churchill

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Angela Freda
        We are talking about only 1% of the equine population needing to be absorbed back into the equine community, rather than slaughtered. I would be ashamed of my bretheren horse-lovers if that percentage of horses is not something we could/would not all step-up to help and take care of.
        Right. Because we are doing such a good job of that right now. What makes you think underfunded, overworked rescues & private horse-owners already stretched to the limit of horses they can foster/adopt are going to suddenly have money, room, and time if slaughter is banned? Isn't the whole mission of many rescues (& individuals) as it is to save as many horses from slaughter as possible? If they can't save them all now, how can they next year?

        The idea that an excuse to keep slaughter legal is so that those who can not afford to provide end of life care to the horses they own is also incredibly impalateable to me. Every horse owner should have an emergency fund for the situation where the horse is no longer viable. Whether this means simply having a bank account or credit card expressly set up with funds for euthenasia, I think it's the least we can offer a companion who does so much for us. I think it boils down to responsability... which imo you accept fully when you purchase a horse (or dog, cat, etc... or have a child)
        SHOULD, yes. And if you'd like to get legislation passed mandating that, just go right ahead and try. But until then (and after then, since there will always be those who break the law), something has to be done with the horses whose owners AREN'T responsible and DON'T care that much. Ending slaughter is not going to suddenly make only responsible people buy horses.

        I think slaughter is awful, and I don't think the money made from shipping horse meat overseas (or the money that goes to the owners who aren't responsible enough to care for the horses themselves) is an excuse to keep the industry going. But if you think that we can just ban slaughter and hey presto! all the horses that would have been slaughtered will have happy homes, you are living in a dream world.
        Proud member of the EDRF

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Angela Freda
          The idea that an excuse to keep slaughter legal is so that those who can not afford to provide end of life care to the horses they own is also incredibly impalateable to me.
          Same here. I cannot for the life of me fathom what anybody is doing owning a horse who cannot come up with $200 or $300 for euthanasia and disposal.

          Originally posted by JumpingPaints
          Things like, "If United States policy were to forbid selling to food commerce, there may be potential political ramifications," is IMHO ridiculous.
          Then why don't we have dog slaughter facilities? After all, some countries eat dog. I'm sure they'd buy the meat. The truth is that the fact that we don't slaughter cats and dogs hasn't affected the beef industry, and if we stop slaughtering horses, it won't affect the beef industry either.

          Comment


          • #6
            something has to be done with the horses whose owners AREN'T responsible and DON'T care that much. Ending slaughter is not going to suddenly make only responsible people buy horses.
            No, enforcing abuse/neglect laws and lobbying lawmakers for stiffer penalties is what's going to improve that situation. Saying that slaughter should be legal to prevent abuse is like saying killing your children is an acceptable alternative to abusing or neglecting them if you realize you can't really afford kids.

            Comment


            • #7
              It sounds like pragmatic and realistic to me. Unlike the pie-in-the-sky unachievable fool's idealism represented as the ONLY acceptable option by the horse worshipers and that odd phemonenon of horses with human parents.

              And, Angela Freda, that is 1% PER YEAR. Get out your little calucalator and figure out what that amounts too after ten years, twenty years. Oh, wait, that article already did it for you. Only took them five years to get to get past FIVE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS in what it would have cost to keep the over 300,000 horses slaughtered from 2000-2005. Figure they have an agenda here and over inflated their numbers by 100% -- that is still $250,000,000. And the cost of keeping horses for sure as heck ain't going down any.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by catknsn
                No, enforcing abuse/neglect laws and lobbying lawmakers for stiffer penalties is what's going to improve that situation. Saying that slaughter should be legal to prevent abuse is like saying killing your children is an acceptable alternative to abusing or neglecting them if you realize you can't really afford kids.
                But that needs to be done FIRST. And how much luck have we all had lobbying for better abuse/neglect laws over the past, say decade? Even when the laws are there, no one wants to enforce them. If we don't fix that problem FIRST, then we just end up with another .5% (allowing for the fact that some people will euthanize or find suitable homes for their horses if slaughter isn't an option) of the US horse population each year starving and being otherwise neglected in people's back fields. Or garages. And that is NO kind of solution.

                The government pays for taking care of kids (after a fashion) whose parents cannot or will not provide for them. Will the government pay for the horses, too? And where will that money come from?
                Proud member of the EDRF

                Comment


                • #9
                  Numbers don't make sense

                  They say that the racehorses are 2% of the slaughtered horses, about 94,000. Doesn't that make less than 2,000 going? All the studies I've read say 13,000 racehorses to slaughter. It brings the entire study into question. It actually is around 14% if the total number is correct. Or is my math off?

                  Nancy
                  www.canterusa.org

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You are exactly correct, it is no excuse and what we need is better enforcement of the laws and tougher sentences. Judges do not protect those that do not vote or have money. Police do not respond properly to these cases too often, they trivialize it as do the judges as seen in the sentencing. I can tell you a local judge came down hard on traffic violations sending someone to jail in shackles while letting one of the most severe animal abuse and neglect cases go with a minimal sentence and he had guns. I have met this judge through personal reasons, not in his court and I got to know his wife pretty well. To this day I don't understand his rulings. I am very familiar with both cases and have first hand knowledge. It's just an example of judges not punishing cases involving animal cruelty because they trivialize the importance of what happened. Personally I think the guy that committed the animal cruelty offence needed psychiatric attention...forever.



                    Originally posted by catknsn
                    No, enforcing abuse/neglect laws and lobbying lawmakers for stiffer penalties is what's going to improve that situation. Saying that slaughter should be legal to prevent abuse is like saying killing your children is an acceptable alternative to abusing or neglecting them if you realize you can't really afford kids.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      *sigh* The article isn't pro slaughter...it's anti the current anti. Which, BTW, isn't working. Things went from frying pan to fire.
                      Without a workable, viable plan, no amount of sentimental slaughter banning will ever work. Bns are talked about and extremely poorly planned, if planned at all. Heart string decisions are good, heart string implementation in a hurry to stop everything isn't so good.
                      You jump in the saddle,
                      Hold onto the bridle!
                      Jump in the line!
                      ...Belefonte

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Wait a minute... Are some of you actually suggesting that people who have a different view or who disagree with you should be silenced? Or that magazines should censor them because they have a different viewpoint?


                        All of the anti-slaughter articles I've read are pretty darn one-sided, too!

                        I'm anti-slaughter myself, but I'm also a big believer in the idea that people are free to have their own opinions AND voice them.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          TheHorse.com and The Horse magazine are in some type of partnership with the AAEP, I subscribe but am not %100 what the affiliation is. The AAEP is Pro-slaughter so you will see articles of a pro-slaughter nature coming from this magazine.

                          I have heard most of these arguments from them before however the new angle of horse meat being part of the “horse Industry” I disagree with. Horse meat is part of the meat industry not the horse industry. And its profits should not be combined with horse industry profits. We have no way of knowing whether that 1% of horses that are being slaughtered would have generated more money alive as part of the horse industry. We really don’t have good figures as to how many horses slaughtered were crippled or injured vs. how many could still be part of the usable or wanted horse category. We merely know that the majority of horses slaughtered are not crippled and are young usable horses. For all we know the horse industry could be loosing revenue due to usable horses being slaughtered.

                          I really see no point in debating this issue; you simply are pro or anti slaughter, no need to talk about it!
                          No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle. ~Winston Churchill

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Someone explain to me why horse slaughter is abominable, yet killing cows, sheep, goats, and chickens is a-okay?

                            It seems awfully hypocritical for people, animal lovers, to pull for the animal that they deem worthy enough to save from slaughter because we view them as "pets"...wheareas the rest of the livestock population isn't given a second thought? What makes horses any more worthy, other than our perception of what is right/wrong (which is a risky thing to discuss, especially in America)? Simply because our culture no-nos the killing of pets for consumption, we go through hell and high water to save them, but in reality...they are no more important than a cow, sheep, goat, or what have you.

                            I straddle the fence. I love animals, and it does make me sad to see anything die in less than a dignified manner, but I also like meat.
                            Roo & Lulu

                            Comment

                            • Original Poster

                              #15
                              I think the operative word here is SLAUGHTER. No one will deny that there are horses who need to be euthanized for whatever reason. But not sent to a slaughterhouse, shot in the head, and cut up for meat. IF horse slaughter were banned, people would be forced to dispose of them in a better way - donation, selling, or euthanizing humanely. Of course some would still resort to the shotgun-in-the-backyard method, but the horse would at least be spared the horror of the meat sale and slaughter truck.
                              There are no statistics or explanations anyone can give me to make me pro-slaughter. None. Most every horse owner I know can spare some change for rescues, and the ones who have their own places might be able to actually foster or rescue ONE HORSE themselves. As a group, horse owners could make a difference. But go ahead and call me idealistic....I just saved a pony mare and her baby and have absolutely no real "use" for a pony. But my heart is fuller for having them now.
                              SPAY/NEUTER/RESCUE/ADOPT!
                              Little Star Chihuahua Rescue
                              The Barkalicious Bakery
                              On Facebook!!!

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by MSP
                                I really see no point in debating this issue; you simply are pro or anti slaughter, no need to talk about it!
                                Sorry, but it isn't that black and white.

                                I, for example, am fully against the way horse slaughter is carried out in the US, for a number of reasons. (So I guess that means I'm anti-slaughter. )

                                I am not, however, against the idea of anyone killing and eating a horse (I'm not saying *I* would ever eat horsemeat, but I don't think it's wrong that some people do). (Whoops - now I'm pro-slaughter! )

                                I am also against the idea of just banning slaughter without considering the consequences of that action and including remedies to those consequences within (or prior to) the slaughter-banning legislation. (Hmm, now I don't know what that makes me...pro or anti?? )

                                The answers, I suspect, will ultimately be found somewhere in the shades of grey.
                                Proud member of the EDRF

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Kementari - I agree with what you said completely.

                                  I'm anti-slaughter b/c of the way it's carried out, though I'm not against the idea of people slaughtering horses to eat them... though personally I wouldn't do it.


                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    [QUOTE=JumpingPaints]I am shocked that The Horse would run an article like this. Not so shocked however, that 4 of the 9 contributors were from Texas, home of two of the three US plants.
                                    QUOTE]


                                    If you are shocked at this.. how shocked will you be to learn that the Texas A&M contributors are also well known to the slaughter plants? Texas A&M routinely sends horses from their various programs to slaughter...what's worse.... Recently we receieved Freedom of Information Act request returns indicating that Texas A&M has also been reprimanded by the USDA for Humane Transport To Slaughter Act violations!!! Yep...just the right people to give an "unbiased" report on horse slaughter.

                                    Absolutely appalling what lenghts these people will go to in order to eek that last few hundred bucks out of a horse!!

                                    Gail
                                    www.horse-protection.org

                                    No Horses to Slaughter Clique

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      I agree with you Kementari.I've been labelled "pro slaughter" many times because I'm very concerned with all the various consequences of the legislation, and how it will effect me as a horse owner. Because I think that there are other things that need attention first (all those horses are unwanted in the first place, and then the whole issue of 'if horses aren't livestock')

                                      I also feel it's hypocritical of us to be so horrified by horse slaughter but not by the slaughter of other living, thinking, and feeling animals. Because I want improvements across the board, and think that banning slaughter right now would cause some problems (some of which are major problems, IMO), I've been called 'pro slaughter' more times than I can count.

                                      Personally, I call it being 'logical'

                                      Then again, if you're any brand of pro choice at all, people screech that you're 'pro abortion' as if you think abortions are fabulous and wonderful.

                                      Black and White thinking is very dangerous. It puts a road block in the way of compromise, and slows the process of actually coming to a solution. Just my opinion, though.*shrug*
                                      Last edited by caffeinated; Jun. 15, 2006, 12:53 PM. Reason: posting editor doesn't come up right and messes up my spacing. Having to edit to put in proper spacing so it's readable, sorry.
                                      "smile a lot can let us ride happy,it is good thing"

                                      My CANTER blog.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by MSP
                                        TheHorse.com and The Horse magazine are in some type of partnership with the AAEP, I subscribe but am not %100 what the affiliation is. The AAEP is Pro-slaughter so you will see articles of a pro-slaughter nature coming from this magazine.
                                        I believe that this magazine is part of the AAEP, it really looks like it in the newsletters they send me. They have sent information that is also anti slaughter such as articles about Nick Zitto and John Hettinger who are leading the way to end horse slaughter and not just for race horses but for all horses. Even though Ferdinand wasn't slaughter in the US it still brought the issue to the forefront and many in the race industry are taking a stand against it. Certainly Church HIll Downs has taken a clear position.

                                        If you are truly looking for a kinder way to treat all animals then have you supported Certified Humane Farming? http://certifiedhumane.org/ or are you just blowing smoke?

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X