OK, I must have cancelled? Anyhow, I'm afraid that I do agree with you, Patty. I have seen older horses, especially in Australia, languishing in a pasture with too little grass.

Diana October 2nd, 2007 10:45:00 AM

I don' t like the idea of sending a horse to slaughter any more than the next person. But options are limited when a horse dies. You can't easily bury a 1,500 pound horse in the backyard next to Fluffy the cat or Rover the dog. I don't even know if there is a facility that can cremate a horse in my area. Even if you own a 500 acre spread with room to spare for an equine memorial plot, in some areas it is illegal to bury livestock.

You even have to take climate into consideration. My sister's horse died in the dead of winter in the upper-midwest. It would have been nearly impossible to dig through the rock-solid frozen soil so she had to call for a rendering truck to pick up her beloved mare (a retired race horse). If she waited for for a thaw and paid hundreds for an excavator she would faced fines for improper disposal of a dead animal. The worst part? She had to pay the rendering company to pick up her horse.

There is an overpopulation problem, but it can't be laid entirely at the feet of the racing industry, If you go to the local horse auctions in my area the ring is filled with poorly bred backyard horses. Too many hobby enthusiasts think they can make a few bucks by breeding their cow-hocked "registered"' mare to the ewe-necked colt the neighbors never got around to gelding to try and make a few bucks. Hundreds of these unsound and untrained pasture ornaments are sold every month in just one local auction - and there are dozens of these just in my midwest state, Nearly every one of them are bred by people who just want to make a few bucks and have no consideration for breeding good quality horses. Almost all of them are bought by the kill-buyers because they have poor conformation and little or no training.

Jen H October 2nd, 2007 11:02:00 AM

I do have to add that the $5 a day cost seems pretty low to me. Elderly horses can be very high maintenance. They generally need their hooves looked after more often because they don't move around and wear down their hooves evenly. Their teeth wear unevenly and need to be floated by a vet. Even with their teeth properly looked after, they still will have trouble chewing and need higher quality feeds to maintain weight. Add in chronic issues like heaves (similar to asthma) or navicular and that elderly pasture ornament gets quite expensive. There are a lot of well-meaning people who put old horses out to pasture but don't care from them properly. I'd rather see them put down humanely than turn into skeletons with overgrown hooves.

My sister bought my cousin's out-grown elderly pony to keep her mare company. The pony actually costs more than the mare to maintain. There are farrier visits every 8 weeks, vet visits every six months to float his teeth, worm & immunize, and daily supplements to control breathing problems. That is over $600 a year and doesn't even include the feed! He needs high-quality alfalfa hay and high-protein feed in addition to pasture to maintain any weight.

Jen H October 2nd, 2007 11:19:00 AM

I agree with Jen regarding where this huge over-population of horses comes from. And to the racing industry and the backyard breeder I'll add the show fad breeders (who breed horses just at poorly conformed as backyard breeders) and the trainers who do way too much too soon on young horses and create soundness problems for life. I board my horse -- half the horses there have huge physical issues. They are lucky to have owners who can afford to care for them.

The on again, off again slaughter issue has caused the market for horses to bottom out. There's a glut right now because people have no where to take them. So what happens to them? I can guarantee that they won't be well cared for. So which is worse? While I believe that when I assume care for an animal I assume the animal's care for life, I don't judge anyone's decision to send a horse to auction. My biggest objection to the horse slaughter industry is how they are transported, which is very inhumane.

And what if a person choses not to send her dangerous, unsound (either one or both) horse to auction but to instead humanely euthanize it -- but who can't find a vet to do it? Where's the "right" in that?

Dr. K, you speak of $5 per day to care for a horse -- I'm assuming you're talking about BLM horses, right?

Deanna October 2nd, 2007 02:33:00 PM

Deanna: That was a figure from an AVMA source. It was used to describe how much Federal funding is allotted to one horse per day wwhile maintained in a Federally funded rescue facility (I didn't know these existed but that was the gist of it). I, too, thought it was low. But BLM? What's that?

Dr. Patty Khuly October 2nd, 2007 03:07:00 PM

Our society is so distanced from the realities in the rest of the world. If someone can benefit from slaughtering these horses and consuming them, then they should. If there is a humane, quick death that can be used, that would be best, but I am not an expert in such things.

It's amazing how many people don't even want to see a chicken that they would normally eat if nicely packaged slaughtered. I wouldn't go near the branch that was used to bleed the chicken out, but I did eat the chicken when I was 6 and saw that for the first time.

Unintended consequences are the hallmark of government these days.

Pax,

MLO

MLO October 2nd, 2007 04:08:00 PM

BLM = Bureau of Land Management (think mustangs - they maintain the wild herds)

We can thank PeTA and their ilk in animal rights for this godawful bill. Their ultimate goal is to wrest animals from our domesticating grip, and one of the best ways to achieve that goal is to make ownership too darned hard. They want horses to no longer be classified as "livestock" - they are now "companion animals" - read that "PETS," just like your dog or cat, and laws in many areas reflect this change. So, no more may you send a horse to the slaughter house.

It's just another giant leap toward the animal-free existence PeTA envisions for you. Banning dogs one breed at a time, mandatory spay/neuter of all dogs over 4 months old, dog laws that declare dogs as dangerous for natural, normal behaviors like "menacing" small animals... It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where all these laws are leading - a pet-free society.

I used to breed and train horses and as I live near the DeKalb facility, I understand the impact the slaughterhouse had on the market. It kept prices up on all horses by keeping the lowest price stable. Yes, I even shipped a few over there myself, including some horses I dearly loved but had gotten too old and were no longer healthy and happy. One was a marvelous stallion who went blind and didn't have the temperament to deal with his loss of sight. Was I happy about it? Heck NO! But what was the alternative? How does one "humanely euthanize" a horse any quicker than the "humane killer" - a bullet at the right spot in the forehead? And once the horse is dead, he's done with his body and whatever happens to it after that was really none of my concern.

I have seen horses die, and they don't die easy. I had a mare with a foal on her side die of colic after a lightning strike. It's something that gave me nightmares for years. Not only that, but there was a 3-day wait for the rendering truck. That was almost a bigger nightmare than watching that mare suffer for hours, crazed with pain, baby screaming in confusion. That rendering truck was a true horror, as was dealing with 1100 pounds of dead animal laying around on a 5-acre farm.

You can believe me when I say that animal rights has nothing to do with animal welfare as we know it, and bills such as the topic of this article are just the beginning of what PeTA and HSUS has in store for our futures. Many animals will suffer, many owners will be traumatized and will decide that it just ain't worth havin' 'em, and so long to the horse industry. Bam. Dogs and cats are also in the crosshairs, and their extinction plan is already emerging from the pipeline. And pigs. Cows will be harder, but the plans are already drawn up.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Tracy D October 2nd, 2007 04:13:00 PM

BRAVO Tracy!! Well said!

This is such an emotional topic - but ultimately (although I am and always will be a "horse person") I cannot for the life of me understand the revulsion toward eating them. Once they're dead, I really don't think the horse cares whether we bury his body, burn it, or cut it up and package it for human consumption. Or put it in dog food - I am old enough to remember when you could buy not only beef or chicken Alpo, but also horsemeat Alpo in the grocery stores.

But a humane death is (I know I'm preaching to the choir here) VERY important. And closing the few remaining slaughterhouses in the US that processed horses just ensured that fewer horses will get that humane death.

Sometimes horse owners just don't have the options that the general public thinks they do. There are fewer and fewer equine vets around, and fewer of those who still do barn calls even for euthanasia. And more and more communities forbid the burial of such a large animal on private property even if you can afford to hire the backhoe.

So here is the consequence of closing the US slaughter houses: (warning, explicit language):
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYS...

Next, of course, the animal rights loonies will just ban horse export, so then what? We'll have a problem with abandoned and starving horses. In the REAL world, it just isn't so simple.

Barb October 2nd, 2007 11:31:00 PM

This is what bothers me about horse owners who send their horses to slaughter: Would you drop your old dog off at the SPCA to wait out his days until no one takes him (because he is old and not useful to you and presumably most of the public who all want puppies), then let someone else euthanize him? I would assume not, we owners are usually right there when we have our cats and dogs "put to sleep."

Here in PA at least, horses are shipped to the New Holland auction, where they languish in small pens until they are bid on, by the pound. Then they are shipped long distances in hot (or freezing depending upon the season) cramped trailers, many built for cattle, not 17h Thoroughbreds. Only after that trip do they get the humane death of a bolt to the head.

My horse is my pet, he's been with me for more than a decade. He will get the same calm, peaceful passage that I afford my other pets when the time comes. Will it be expensive? Probably. Will I regret not making him wait days for his end, alone and stressed because he's been moved all over the country? Most certainly not. Animals are a responsibility, don't own them (and more importantly don't breed them) if you cannot afford to treat them properly in life and death.

JessinPA October 3rd, 2007 12:09:00 AM

I respectfully disagree.
As with dogs and cats, as long as this 'cash crop' has a value people will continue to overbreed horses. AQHA is pro-slaughter, after all, it's a convenient way to get rid of culls or overbred stock. For those who may not be familiar with where these horses come from and how they are treated on the way to the plant, I would like to educate you.

First most start out at auction. Here some would have a second chance at life if any information was given about the horses, but often they are run through loose (no halter) by the lb with no information (even the basics of gender) stated. I currently have a five year old AQHA mare in my pasture- registered with nothing wrong with her at all. There were other unbroken young quarterhorses at the auction that were not run through by the lb and were purchased by private owners.
I outbid the killbuyer on this mare, and I believe she would have been purchased by a private owner had the auctioneer paused to mention that she was registered (he had her papers) and young. I just adopted her out.
She came from a ranch that overbred and didn't have enough hay. Other horses that were dropped off by this ranch were not so lucky and were purchased by the kill buyer. As I separated my mare from her ranchmates, they whinnied shrilly back and forth struggling to be reunited.

Her ranchmate was loaded on a huge semi stock trailer. All the horses purchased by this killbuyer were loaded on the same trailer with no divisions between them. If you've been around horses you know that putting two horses that don't know each other in close quarters often results in injury. Often these horses exit the truck at the feedlot with fresh injuries from the ride.

The majority of the loose horses at this auction were girl scout camp horses that were either not standing up to all day riding, had received an injury, or were too much for small inexperienced riders.

The good trained riding horses sold ok that day,.. but none of the girl scout camp horses had a chance.

If dogs could be sold by the lb we would have more of an overbreeding problem. People could pass off their problems without legal ramifications, accusations of abuse or neglectful breeding, or taking financial responsibility for their animals. Think of how often you hear someone or another complaining about the cost of euthanasia and disposal of smaller animals,... don't you think some of them would rather have some pittance in their pocket rather than pay a vet to euthanize?

If horse people were forced to take responsibility for shoddy breeding practices that rely on 'culling' to achieve their goals... there would eventually be fewer horses being neglected, overbred, etc.

Part of the problem is that if slaughter is stopped because horses will be considered more pets than livestock in this country, our humane societies and government must be willing to up the ante on lacksadasical enforcement of humane treatment practices for horses.

I used to live about five miles from a lady who had a horse that was five, but was so stunted, skinny, and potbellied it looked like a yearling and a pony with sleds for hooves. I called the humane society on her (I found out she had horses when they escaped one day and the cops called me asking if I knew who they belonged to- they were being kept in a closed barn all the time in a pen filled with manure). Because her horses had water and hay (old and moldy) no action was taken. Dogs kept in the same conditions wouldn't have been left with the owner.

Humane societies will need to work with local equine rescues to pull horses from inhumane situations. If euthanization is merited, hopefully that will be the way unwanted horses will be handled in the future rather than slaughter.

Our horses do deserve better. We need to make all horse owners responsible for their animals health, safety, life, and death.

jen October 3rd, 2007 03:32:00 PM

I should state that I am in WA, and therefore many horses come up or through this way on the way to slaughterhouses over the border in Canada.

Slaughter is not stopped by the change of legislation. The price of horsemeat is still decent... (for instance, on the hoof price was about .38 cents a pound at the auction I most recently attended... and all horses were purchased that ran through the auction).

jen October 3rd, 2007 03:38:00 PM

I thought the legislation in congress was prompted by the treatment of wild horses, those caught on BLM land in the west. At least, that's how it's being presented to us here in the west, especially here in the state with the wild horse on the quarter. We're told that the government is allowing ranchers to graze on BLM land for free, and in exchange, the BLM is removing all the wild horses that the land will no longer "support". I thought the bill was primarily to prevent those wild horses from being caught and sent to slaughter, because as we're being told, they're a part of the heritage of the west and they deserve protection. I had no idea this bill was primarily about people's pets or overbreeding.

Out of curiousity, would you support killing unwanted dogs and cats for export to China, the Philippines, and a number of other countries in south Asia and the south Pacific?

Leigh-Ann October 3rd, 2007 03:50:00 PM

Leigh-Ann: On the cat and dog thing: It's easy to trivialize this question (as I did) by citing the lack of economic drive for such an arrangement. But let's say you *could* get $5 a pound for dead dogs by selling them to China. Ignoring the health issues inherent in such a plan, I might grudgingly concede--on principle, anyway.

My rationale? Here's protein someone in this overpopulated world will consume. Here's money potentially for use in our efforts to handle our own overpopulation issues. After all, what's the ultimate difference between "livestock" and "pets" once they're dead? If humans were consumed for protein (think "Soylent Green") I might also agree to sell our own bodies to offset our healthcare costs. The practical implications are what limit us. And religious/cultural tenets, of course.

Though you make a fine point by asking this question, Leigh-Ann, what I really dislike about this entire debate on unwanted horse slaughter is that it points out what we tend to ignore: that we don't truly believe our livestock are slaughtered humanely. (Otherwise, why quibble over who eats what? It's really more about who gets killed how. OK, so the human hubris involved in breeding animals with nary a thought for their demise is perhaps a larger issue, but at least we're talking about that one.)

In general, I would agree with this anti-slaughter indictment of our animal agriculture industry. As someone who hasn't yet found a decent slaughterhouse for my own goats, I'll throw my hat into the ring on that point. Again, it's the moral and practical implications that limit my holding a bedrock-firm stance on this issue, not the concept of eating animals, per se, pets or otherwise.

Dr. Patty Khuly October 4th, 2007 10:13:00 AM

Dr. Patty wrote: " ... we don't truly believe our livestock are slaughtered humanely. (Otherwise, why quibble over who eats what? ... )

Now, that is an excellent observation! But I think it goes even further than that. I think this debate points to our increasing tendency toward anthropomorphization. We can't deal with the thought of someone (or some other animal) eating of the flesh of an animal to which we have become emotionally bonded because we often view our animal companions as PEOPLE - at least in a way - which makes such a practice akin to cannibalism in our minds.

There - I said it. The C-word. I do believe that is the crux of the matter and all the other arguments are just icing on the cake.

Jen objects to horses being transported in non-climate-controlled stock trailers. Well, geez... I haven't seen many horse trailers that are, and if heating and air conditioning were required of anyone hauling a horse from point A to B, I could venture a guess that it wouldn't be long before the horse industry completely collapsed. It's already becoming difficult enough to haul a horse even to the farm down the road because of health certification requirements. Might they fight in a trailer? Sure, but for the most part, once the trailer gets moving the horses are busy enough trying to maintain their balance in a moving vehicle that they'll knock off any shenanigans in pretty short order.

Horses, I maintain, are livestock. I think it's lovely that Jen would grant hers the same quality of dispatch as she would a dog or cat, and I would not begrudge her the right to do so. While I did love my horses, I do not feel the same toward horses as I do my dogs (and formerly cats, too) with which I shared my home, my food, and perhaps even my bed with. I would not even think of considering my horses as "fur babies" or surrogate kids, as people tend to think of dogs and cats, nor do I believe that they develop the deep emotional bond with us that our dogs and cats do (more dogs than cats). Perhaps Jen does not realize that by legally mandating things like climate-controlled trailers of certain heights and euthanasia by injection and body disposal by burial or incineration as opposed to butchering or rendering, horse husbandry could become so problematic that most folks would just get out of the business, making those few remaining horses prohibitively expensive, available only to the super-wealthy. Rather than sharing such a wonderful, intimate relationship with her special horse, she may just be admiring the species at a distance.

Which is, of course, the goal of the AR activists. Sometimes, one has to look at the bigger picture.

Tracy D October 4th, 2007 12:20:00 PM

First off, never did I mention climate controlled horse trailers. My problem is not with the temperature or the height of the trailer as you said..
"Jen objects to horses being transported in non-climate-controlled stock trailers. Well, geez... I haven't seen many horse trailers that are, and if heating and air conditioning were required of anyone hauling a horse from point A to B, I could venture a guess that it wouldn't be long before the horse industry completely collapsed. It's already becoming difficult enough to haul a horse even to the farm down the road because of health certification requirements. Might they fight in a trailer? Sure, but for the most part, once the trailer gets moving the horses are busy enough trying to maintain their balance in a moving vehicle that they'll knock off any shenanigans in pretty short order."

Having been to an equine feedlot, having seen meat sellers loading their hroses after an auction, having seen the ruckus in the trailer occurring while people stand around and talk... Horses come off the trailer with kicks and bites, swollen and broken limbs, neurological injuries, having been trampled, eye injuries, soft tissue injuries and hematomas, etc etc. Having been a horse owner, I am sure Tracy would know that you don't stick multiple horses that don't know each other in a space slightly more than standing room only. THIS is what I object to, the fact that many horses come off the trailer with severe injuries.

While I am not a fan of the captive bolt technology (having seen it used very well in cattle slaughterhouses here and in France and still seen and heard cows screaming while being hoisted, squirming while the guy with the captive bolt runs over to frantically administer several more bolts to the head). I know that at least one slaughterhouse in Canada is administering a 22 shot to the head, which I find a bit easier to stomach.

This said, do you think it would be so bad for horses to be the domain of only those with the money to take care of them properly? I am not rich, but even with unbelievably high hay prices in my area this winter and the cost of vet care etc I am not dumping any horses at auction,.. but then again, I'm not breeding either. I could, I have three mares and a gelding, but I can't support them and don't want them ending up at auction so I don't breed.

Would it be so bad for others to have the prices of horses bottom out incredibly (as profitable disposal methods vanish) and then rise slowly and eventually? I think that would be a long term solution that would help eventually eliminate those that truly cannot afford to have or care for or breed horses.

jen October 4th, 2007 01:32:00 PM

I became a vegetarian not because I think eating meat is wrong, but because of the disgusting ways animals are brought up and dispatched before being packaged for us to eat. So in any matter like this, I take issue with the means rather than the ends. I used to eat cows and chickens and pigs, and those animals are not so different from horses. Neither are cats and dogs, to be honest. We kill these animals all the time because no one wants them, and then we bury or burn their bodies. Objectively speaking, it is a waste.

The issue would be a lot easier to discuss if someone like the vet or a shelter were able to euthanize the animal first (perhaps by gassing?) and then sell it to whoever wants to eat it. Hey, remember everyone, shelters already do sell their euthanized animals to pet food companies! Not much of a jump to sell it to people.

Agnes October 5th, 2007 02:27:00 AM

Agnes: Check out my post on vegetarianism and vet medicine for my thoughts on your point.
http://www.dolittler.com/index.cfm/2007/5/1/pet.ve...

Dr. Patty Khuly October 5th, 2007 08:40:00 AM

One additional point to keep in mind regarding the export of a livestock animal not raised for food is various food safety issues. There are various drugs used in livestock, horses and others, which cannot be used in animals destined for human consumption. Additionally various drugs used on livestock have a pre-harvest interval, aka after the drug is given to the animal a certain period of time must pass before it can be slaughtered for consumption.

Who is preventing the kill buyers from buying horses who have had these drugs used on them either within the course of their lifetime or within the designated pre-harvest interval? Nobody. They don't have a clue as to a given horse's medical background, medications previously administered, etc. Considering the large number of t-breds and performance horses that end up unsound and in the processing plants, it is highly likely that horses with an extensive history of medical treatment end up there on occasion. It is also highly likely that horses with drugs that would render a cow to be deemed unsafe for human consumption in their system end up in the food chain.

I, for one, don't like to think of sending meat with such issues to other countries. After all, we are not sending our horses to needy areas in africa or starving children, the meat is being exported as a delicacy, a treat, to those who can afford it in Asia and, decreasingly so, in Europe.

Another interesting thing to research is the shipment of live just weaned foals from PMU farms to Asia- live, on a boat. Not as big of an issue anymore with the reduction in PMU production as estrogen therapy fell out of favor, but...

Jen October 9th, 2007 01:08:00 PM

The people who actually know anything about the horse industry can tell you that the horses sent to slaughter are well taken care of. It would not be profitable for the meat buyers if they were not. If horses were abused, they would shrink too much to make any money,also during transport the company hauling these horses have to have insurance for animal welfare having to put in claims for any injured or dead horses raising the cost for them.This being said, the horses are looked after very well during transport to prevent any claims.The adoption groups fail to mention the horses that get injured in transport to their facilities and they cant say it don't happen (to them it would just be an accident that couldn't be prevented). People that do not agree with slaughter plants should remember what horses were originally used and bred for and that they were not kept as pets. Horses were used as profitable livestock the same as cows and pigs. Many families and ranches still raises horses for meat for there lively hood.What happens when somebody buys a cow or pig and turns it into a pet, is the government supposed to shut down the cow and hog plants? I read in one letter that a person wrote that horses were not consumed in the U.S so they should not be slaughtered there. When they state that then any other products animals or not, that are produced in the states that are not used or consumed here should be banned also, no matter the economical impact.

J.Meston December 9th, 2007 11:49:00 PM

BS J. Meston! Horses are not treated humanely in transit! So why have the NY State Police stopped double decker livestock carriers for cruelty? We had a bunch off loaded in Syracuse, impounded for cruelty and treated by vets at the show fair grounds where there were ample stalls. Many were adopted out later. The carrier was fined - not enough in my opinion though. Nor are they slaughtered humanely - look at the gross tapes on U-tube if you can stomach it. As far as AC trailers, most of the commercial haulers have climate controlled rigs with air ride. AC is not a luxury that is doled out to slaughter route horses. And another thing-most 2-4 horse rigs do not need AC. These folks are showing, transporting shorter distances. The aid flow through the trailer is adequate. Try over stuffing slaughter bound horses, all sexes, in a rig made for transport of 12 but carrying 20+! Gimme a break. That is not humane and it makes me sick. I bred horses for a number of years. My contract stated if you had to sell the horse, contact me first. I will either buy the horse back or help you place the animal in a responsible, caring home. But it's not just my contract - I will help any animal I can. My geriatrics are home, in known surroundings with known people and cared for for life. Food will come off my table, and has, before they suffer. That is my vow to them. We all die. My contention is that it does not have to be painful, fear fraught, abusive. I am not very happy about the slaughter of other feed animals as well. Cruel is cruel and I am against it! Yes, we do have a problem and we must find a humane way to deal with it.

Judy April 18th, 2009 08:56:31 PM

good information

sem

search engine marketing

adfdasf June 1st, 2009 03:17:42 AM

دردشة

منتديات

يوتيوب

trtryy June 26th, 2009 12:39:37 PM

The ugg knightsbridge world is a comedy to those who thinks, a tragedy to those ugg classic cardy who feels.Look not mournfully into the ugg boots past, it comes not back again. Wisely improve the present, it is ugg lo pro button thine. Go forth to meet the shadowy future, without fear, and with a manly ugg bailey button heart. http://www.ugg2you.com/specials.html

Ugg Boots October 29th, 2009 10:10:52 PM

However mean your life is, tiffany jewelry meet it and live it do not shun it and call it hard discount tiffany jewelry unt tiffany jewelry It is not so bad as you are.It looks poorest when you are richest.

tiffany jewelry November 13th, 2009 01:05:19 AM