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

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

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

Board Rules

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

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

Horse Slaughter Bill UPDATE + URLs

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

  • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
    The recent Texarkana case comes to mind, the one in which it took several animal welfare groups persisting to get something done to make the person (shipping 13 stallions unsegregated in one trailer amongst 3 other non-stallions) accountable.

    This is what I mean by finding and slipping through loopholes.
    How is that ok, for any species, but in this instance and on this bb, for horses in particular?
    I'm confused... where has anyone in this thread suggested that it's OK for slaughter companies not to follow regulations?

    Of course it's not. There should be mechanisms in place to be sure that the regulations are followed, and when they're not, violators should be punished in a way that makes it very much in their interest not to violate again.

    Unfortunately, that's not what's happening, and the companies know it, so they go ahead and violate the regulations. I think everyone is in agreement that we have an enforcement and compliance problem... so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make... ?

    Comment


    • Well personally because I'd never trust the anti groups that once its banned they would ever in any way, shape, or form listen to any reason to change it back. The anti groups are the ones that want the law changed why don't they spend their time, money, and efforts to work with the other side if there honestly interested in the horses rather then there agenda to ban slaughter?

      Myself if this bill fails theres no way I'd ever listen to them after the fact and I don't see any groups like the ACA etc doing so either. So far the anti groups have said they want all or nothing. If it ends up nothing theres no reason for pro groups to then work with them for changes.
      Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JumpingPaints View Post
        So why did none of you laud the suggestion of Coyoteco, below when it was posted? This would prevent hundreds of thousands of horses from suffering until the changes were made to the system, addressing all the issues above. How about walking the walk?
        Because I don't think it will work the way Coyoteco thinks it will.

        If the ban fails to pass, and all of you guys start working on improving regulations instead, I'll absolutely be on board. But I don't think this is good legislation, and you're not going to convince me to support it "for now" so that we can change it all later.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Erin View Post
          Because I don't think it will work the way Coyoteco thinks it will.
          And I guess I don't think what has been suggested by the pro-slaughter camp to change the system will work either.

          If you look realistically at the immense effort, money and cuts into the s/h's profits it would take to bring about the changes, you know realistically it will never happen. If commerical slaughter continues, it will always continue to be inhumane.

          Originally posted by Erin
          If the ban fails to pass, and all of you guys start working on improving regulations instead, I'll absolutely be on board.
          Okay, how about all of you guys that really believe it can be accomplished taking the initiative on improving the regs now - to show us that the USDA, slaughterhouses, DOT and everyone else that would have to change are really willing and able to do so?
          "There's something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man" ~ Sir Winston Churchill

          Comment


          • I don't hold out any hope for both sides working together to improve conditions. The 'pro-slaughter' camp, for lack of a better term (since pro-choice is already being used) has already expressed the opinion that slaughter is a perfectly humane solution as it stands. We could spend a few more years arguing over the definition of "humane".
            DON'T MAKE ME COME DOWN THERE!!! - God

            Comment


            • Originally posted by county View Post
              Angela, bred and pregnant are the same thing and yes show me where it says a bred animal cannot be slaughtered.
              As I stated in my previous post the regulations are concerning SHIPPING horses:

              http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/e...-brochure.html

              Prior to the commercial transportation of horses to a slaughtering facility, the owner or shipper must:

              Give each horse an opportunity to eat and drink for a period of not less than 6 consecutive hours immediately before loading the animal in the vehicle.

              Apply a USDA backtag to each horse in the shipment with a bar code and a production date. (Backtags are available at recognized slaughtering establishments or from APHIS personnel.)

              Complete and sign an owner/shipper certificate that includes the name, address, and phone number of the shipper and receiver (slaughter plant) and the transporting vehicle's license and registration number.

              Certify that each horse is able to bear weight on all four limbs, is not blind in both eyes, is able to walk unassisted, **is not a mare that is likely to foal during the trip**, is older than 6 months, and has had access to food, water, and rest for 6 consecutive hours before being loaded into a vehicle.

              Document identifying marks (brands, tattoos, scars, etc.).

              Document breed, color, and sex.

              Document any preexisting condition of the animal prior to shipment to prove the condition did not occur during transport.

              Falsification of any certificate or document is a criminal offense and may result in a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both.
              Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

              Comment


              • Ya I've read all that. My meaning was show me where a bred animal cannot be shipped to slaughter.
                Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

                Comment


                • I'm confused how those posters against the ban because they tell us that it will not be enforced because killer buyers/shippers will be illegally shipping to slaughter in CA/MX, and that there are not enough people/money to enforce the ban, are now telling us that we should just work to get those same enforcement personnel to enforce laws that are purposely written to contain gray areas.

                  Wouldn't it be easier to enforce a law that bans shipping to slaughter, period, rather than expecting them to all of a sudden agree to not ship in the current fashion (violating the Humane transport act- Weight bearing (how much?), not due to foal imminently (in 5 hrs? one day? one week?- Heck- even breeders spend weeks on foal watch because it is so hard to predict), blind in both eyes (How many are trained equine opthamaligists?), segregate sexes (yeah...right), stop for food/water within X hrs...not happeneing)

                  But we anti-slaughter people are supposed to believe that the same people who couldn't enforce an easily understandable "no-shipping to slaughter" rule, according to the pro side, will suddenly be able to enforce a bunch of currently vague laws...

                  Sorry- I'll keep pressing for a ban.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Lildunhorse View Post
                    I don't hold out any hope for both sides working together to improve conditions. The 'pro-slaughter' camp, for lack of a better term (since pro-choice is already being used) has already expressed the opinion that slaughter is a perfectly humane solution as it stands. We could spend a few more years arguing over the definition of "humane".
                    Please show me where anyone has said in this thread that horse slaughter in this country is OK as it stands.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Erin View Post
                      Like I said earlier, you need to remember their motive -- PROFIT. If the penalties are such that they can't afford to NOT follow the regulations, you betcha they're going to change.
                      But my argument is that the enforcement of those regulations they ignore is going to cost someone something. There are penalties in place already, but they are largely ignored.
                      Again I'll point to the Texarkana shipping case where the guy had 13 unsegregated stallions in a load of 16 horses and walked... after a USDA inspector and vet looked over the horses. It was not until ALOT of noise and evidence was presented by animal welfare groups that they reconsidered.
                      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
                        But we anti-slaughter people are supposed to believe that the same people who couldn't enforce an easily understandable "no-shipping to slaughter" rule, according to the pro side, will suddenly be able to enforce a bunch of currently vague laws...
                        No, they're not going to suddenly start enforcing them.

                        But, like with everything else, if you have public support and put pressure on them, you can improve enforcement and you can improve the laws.

                        And obviously you all know that, because if a ban is passed, we're going to need better laws and enforcement regarding what goes across the border... and if you didn't think it was possible, you'd never have been working for a ban in the first place.

                        Comment


                        • Well you can certainly go for a 100% ban rather then try and work together thats your right. But you have the Senate to get by who many are rich oil people or are backed by them. Most the big oil people and others like them own or are part owners of large cattle operations ( tax purposes ). You also have a presendent whose right in the middle of all those oil and cattle people plus hes from there home state. To get this ban passed your going to have to convince all those cattlemen not to be royally pissed at the senators who vote for it after using the rich boys money to get in office.

                          Then you have to have a presendent pass it and return home to Tx. in two years and face a lynch mob.

                          Myself I'll play the cards I'm holding over the best draw you can hope for. Lost before and can again but I'll still play those cards.
                          Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by county View Post
                            Ya I've read all that. My meaning was show me where a bred animal cannot be shipped to slaughter.
                            As soon as you show me where I said that in the first place.

                            And most of the breeding farms I worked did not consider a bred mare to be pregnant. When you introduce Semen you have bred that mare. This does not mean she will be pregnant.
                            Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                              But my argument is that the enforcement of those regulations they ignore is going to cost someone something. There are penalties in place already, but they are largely ignored.
                              OK then... are you willing to pay a horse licensing fee? That'd help pay for additional inspectors.

                              Are you willing to pay more for hamburger? That'd pay for additional inspectors.

                              Are you willing to pay more taxes in general? If the gov't decides to add a bunch more USDA inspectors, their salaries have to come from somewhere.

                              Like I said before, you can't just wish tax money to go somewhere. It's all earmarked for something. If you want it to go to humane slaughter, then you need legislation to dictate that, whether it's coming from an additional tax on the companies doing the slaughtering or the consumers.

                              I still don't really understand what your complaint is. If you think the slaughter facilities should pay into the system of inspections, sure, that sounds great. No one has said they shouldn't. But it still requires legislation to be passed to accomplish that.

                              Comment


                              • I do not beleive there was a USDA inspector present at the Texarkana case. Myth
                                Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Erin View Post
                                  Please show me where anyone has said in this thread that horse slaughter in this country is OK as it stands.
                                  That is how I interpreted the letter quoted at the beginning of this thread that uses the phrase "humane, veterinarian-supervised euthanasia" to describe horse slaughter. If you go their website and read their full report, that's what they seem to say.

                                  I can only speak for myself, but when I refer to the pro-slaughter people I'm not talking about the people who post here but about the groups actively leading the campaign to defeat the bill.
                                  Last edited by Spoilsport; Oct. 13, 2006, 06:31 PM. Reason: spelling & clarity

                                  Comment


                                  • Post #185 Angela and since you want to split hairs then show me where theres regs that pregnant mares cannot be shipped to slaughter.
                                    Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by county View Post
                                      I do not beleive there was a USDA inspector present at the Texarkana case. Myth
                                      Not Myth:

                                      Texarkana, Arkansas police say the driver of a horse trailer stopped at a business Thursday when someone noticed the horses were injured.

                                      The driver told police he was hired to drive the horses from Mississippi to a slaughter house in Fort Worth. But questions were raised if the transportation of the injured horses was "inhumane" and if they were suffering.

                                      **A vet and a representative with the USDA** both determined the horses were not suffering.

                                      The man was cited with 20 counts of animal cruelty, which is a misdemeanor.

                                      Here's the link:
                                      http://www.kpxj21.com/news/state/3440951.html
                                      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

                                      Comment


                                      • I remember reading that but I beleive ( and like I said I could be wrong ) it was later determined that the guy was not a USDA inspector but someone who worked for the local sale barn.
                                        Quality doesn\'t cost it pays.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by county View Post
                                          Post #185 Angela and since you want to split hairs then show me where theres regs that pregnant mares cannot be shipped to slaughter.
                                          Post 206 has the USDA regs for shipping to slaughter straight from the USDA brochure.
                                          I corrected my post, stating that it was "mares imminent to foaL" in a later post. It's neither bred mares as you stated I said, not pregnant mares, btu those imminent to foal.
                                          Somone else concurred that determining the imminence of foaling is something most breeding farms would pay good money for. It's not a science... and therefore a loophole regulation written so loosely you can drive a semi through it. Then after writing it so, they leave the determination of this imminent foaling (or not ) up to the shipper.
                                          Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

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

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X