It’s not just the economy that’s withering. It’s the hay in the fields in the parched Southeast and the fat on the backs of horses who would consume it. It’s also the skyrocketing price of grain and the fuel required to move it. An NPR report this morning treated me to another sad story of increased equine abandonment with these explanations for owners’ rationale.
A veterinary industry periodical also hit this hot button with a description of Mexican slaughterhouse conditions for horses and stats showing how the horses crossing the Rio Grande in their direction are doing so in record numbers. HSUS provides its recap of this problem here.
Ever since horsemeat slaughterhouses where banned stateside, Mexico’s been doing a brisk business in our close-to-the-border castoffs—albeit by means less than acceptable by US standards. It’s disgusting, the practices considered by-the-book in places where animal life and human health aren’t as valuable as they are here.
And what are families with horses to do when their land is being foreclosed on? When they have no money for grain and the last grass in the pasture has been long gone for weeks.
I pay $6 a bushel for Timothy and Alfalfa for my goats. It’s $18 a bale! I’ve all but stopped buying it since there’s still plenty of roughage in the foliage they have at their disposal in my yard. But horses need far more than goats can make do on. I can just imagine the havoc a half-ton grain-swilling pet can wreak on one’s limited finances.
OK, so maybe they shouldn’t have taken on a horse. Ten or twenty years ago it might’ve seemed a reasonable family addition, but now? Because horses can live a very looong time, upbraiding their owners for not having a crystal ball seems an exercise in futility—and maybe even unfairness. Things can happen.
According to the NPR report, the rescue operator they interviewed claimed she gets frequent calls begging her to take in horses. (She already keeps 90.) Apparently they call in tears over their horses’ imminent starvation. So it’s not always that people don’t care. It’s that sometimes they just can’t manage the responsibility anymore. Period.
What would you do? Euthanize your pet, right? If you had no other alternative I bet you would. I’m told that costs at least $500 for most people. It’s not cheap. First the vet then the drugs then the hole in the ground you need to rent a backhoe to dig if you can’t afford the steep haul-away and cremation fees. If you had the $500 you could probably afford to feed her for another few months. So what’s the next alternative?
Some say we should reverse our decision to keep equine slaughterhouses out of the US. Horse vets I know are horrified by the conditions they find animals in—all the time. They’re begging us to reopen the horse processing plants as a way to help end the misery—by giving owners a way out.
The most responsible owners will search far and wide for a solution they may or may not find. The less responsible will elect to neglect their horses out of eyeshot, leaving them to starve and die on their abandoned land. It’s a common scenario playing out more and more as economic conditions for horse owners get tougher and no relief is on the horizon?
Heigh-ho Silver.
Would we accept horsemeat, if only to ship it away for those who would consider it an excellent source of protein? In my eyes it sure beats a trip to a South of the Border slaughterhouse—not to mention starvation.
Where do I begin here? I see nothing wrong with humane euthanasia of a horse when there is no other option. Better than starving to death slowly. Better than "out of sight out of mind". As for disposal of the body, horse owners should consider that when they purchase a horse, so the decision does not have to be made in a hurry, or not made. Its part of owning a horse - its not like owning a budgie that you can bury in the backyard. Before you buy your horse, work out strategies for this and other problems that arise, like not being able to pay a vet bill.
Robin - I agree that thinking ahead is a good idea. But no one can imagine everything that may happen over the course of a person's (and their horse's ) life.
Usually, I am totally appalled when people give up pets because they are moving, or they just don't want them anymore.
But a horse is a little different (which is why you rightly point out that folks have got to think carefully about the committment). A horse not only needs food, it needs space. You have to either own land or rent pasturing/stabeling - and if your property goes into foreclosure - the second alternative can be unaffordable over the long run.
I moved to New Zealand from the US, and feed my pets raw meat. While I was initially appalled at the thought of feeding my pets horsemeat, I did buy some after calling the company that sold it and inquiring about the horses- they are not bred for meat, I was told. Turned out, the pets are very happy to eat it, they gobble it down like crazy. It is dark red like beef, and rather lean. Also, it's very affordable, compared to the other meats (beef, chicken, lamb). Ultimately I've become a big consumer of horsemeat for the pets. I'm so glad to have this option here, I wish the US would revise it's position on horse slaughter.
All of the available options make me cringe. I was hoping with the passage of the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act, we'd see the foundation of dozens of new horse sanctuaries. Even more than that is clearly needed. I don't want horses slaughtered for consumption but I don't know what the answer is either.
Lots of pets are being abandoned for economic reasons now esp. with the foreclosures.
How can we help the horses (not by leading them over the border . . . )
The horse slaughter ban was a bad law with severe consequences for the animals it was supposed to help. I don't like the thought of horses being cruelly slaughtered, but an outright ban on the practice of horse slaughter seems to have the same negative effect as other bans, e.g. abortion, alchohol and drug comsumption, tobacco, etc., etc., etc. I don't think it was Wayne Pacelle's (HSUS CEO) intention to be associated with Cary Nation ( the Prohibition promoter), but that's what I think of him right now. Has anyone at the HSUS actually lived in a farming area, except for attending some "upstate university" that the locals can't get into? What was the rationale for pushing the legislation to ban horse slaughter? A test case? Sanctuaries for horses? The HSUS did a great PR job with dogs and cats after Katrina hit New Orleans, but the organization seems oblivious to the problems of horses as a result of the the slaughter ban. Where's the will and the MONEY to deal with horses that people can't take care of properly anymore? It's as difficult to plan for natural disasters as it is for economic downturns. If the HSUS could summon up the savvy to help the stranded pets of New Orleans, why can't it come up with some plan to help horse owners who are desperate as a result of its political activities? Maybe it's time for the HSUS and Wayne Pacelle to get some negative publicity. Any ideas?
It was inevitable that anything that would eventually help the horse overbreeding and overpopulation problem in the US would cause problems first.
Not to mention, at the time the law was enacted, the PMU farms had lost contracts and were already flooding and had flooded the market with horses.
HOWEVER, that said, I think that the prevention act will have long term benefits for horses in the US. There will be NO financial benefit to breeding and selling low-quality stock. Horses should diminish in the market- humane euthanasia will be the best option for disposal... people won't be able to make money off of the unfortunate unwanted horses.
You know, it's still legal to shoot a horse. An owner in dire straits can take the horse out back and (humanely) kill it with a bullet to the brain. In almost every book I have on horses there is a diagram showing you where to shoot to kill a horse that is suffering. You know the diagram, the head with the 'x marks the spot' to show you where to aim,.
This is an issue that is tough to describe to non-farm or non-horse people. It's not just a matter of "disposal". Horses are in a fuzzy area between pets and livestock. Horse owners are not callous and love their animals as much as other pet owners love their companions. But whether you own horses for sport or pleasure there are practical considerations.
Very few horses are kept as simply companion animals. They have a job to do. That job can range from occasional weekend trail rides to competitive sports like racing or Grand Prix jumping. What do you do when little Suzy grows too big for her pony? Tell her tough. We can't afford another horse so you have to quit riding until Snowball dies of old age? Or do you sell snowball and buy a new horse. We don't do this with dogs or cats because their primary use is as companions. Injury, age, or ability doesn't really diminish their usefulness in that capacity.
If you have to put down a pony suffering from old age or an injured sport horse in the prime of life it's a very difficult decision that nobody takes lightly. But most horse-owners that I know just want a humane death. What happens to the remains is less important. Those who tell others to simply "plan ahead" know very little about the laws and regulations regarding the disposal of livestock. Some places simply don't allow it. In other areas it's nearly impossible due to geography or climate. Ever tried to dig a hole big enough for a 1,000 pound horse in frozen ground?
Space and feed requirements make keeping them in rescues a very expensive proposition. Because of previous slaughter bans the mustang population has grown to the point where the US Government is paying private landowners to care for herds of mustangs. They are doing their best to prevent breeding but the mustang birth rates are still far-exceeding adoptions. A well-regulated *humane* slaughter option is in the best interests of the taxpayers, the over-grazed land and the overall health of over-crowded herds. That would allow more resources for rescues and education.
Overall, though. I do believe that there is one small benefit from the ban. There will be no mare market for the backyard breeders that used to be perfectly happy to get $200 or $300 at auction for the poorly bred yearlings they keep pumping out just so they can "get some money back" from the horses they never actually use.
" Before you buy your horse, work out strategies for this and other problems that arise, like not being able to pay a vet bill."
Robin, It is very easy to sit up on a pedestal looking down at all the struggling people and pass judgement. You have no idea the circumstances anyone was in when the decision was made to purchase a horse. Nor what has transpired since. Maybe the owner is dying of cancer. Maybe the family had their savings wiped out caring for a sick child. Maybe a million other things. You have no idea.
Stefani, here's an idea for you since you like the idea of sanctuaries.
There's a guy near here who has an exotic and big cat sanctuary. (Lion, tiger, panthers, etc.) Hmmmm... what to feed, what to feed.....
His phone number is on the bulletin board at the barn where I keep my horse. If I am able, I will donate my horse's remains to this guy when her time comes (after having her humanely dispatched).
Life's facts aren't always pretty. Just like the unintended consequences of the horse slaughter ban aren't pretty. The fact is, there just isn't enough money and land for horse sanctuaries.
Horses are the latest population of unwanted pets to be added to cats and to a lesser extent dogs. It seems to me that none of these species have nation-wide access to appropriate euthanasia when unwanted or otherwise financially unsupported. Slaughter was a 'release valve' for that population which was already experiencing declines in supply with the large scale replacement of premarin and other market effects.
Whether one is for or against slaughter per se I think more work could have been done to get ahead of the consequences--even it is was only having some mechanism for reliably quantifying them. The extent to which we deal with cat and dog population is at least somewhat recorded and tracked to allow the success and failure of various tactics to be determined amidts the overhead battle of ideologies (none of which matter much to any given animal except in what they cause us to *do*)
I really sympathize with the horse owners who are having to give up their horses. It would break my heart for my family to give up our three!
For those who have commented that we should plan ahead when taking on a horse, just as though we would if we had a cat or a dog, consider this - up here in Maine, we do not have a drought and we have enough land to set aside for hay. We like to be on the safe side and set aside *at least* a bale a day for each horse, since they would eat more in the winter and less in the summer (when they can graze).
Hay has been about $3 a bale up here. So, that would be about $1100 per horse per year. That doesn't include the cost of shoeing, vet care, emergency vet care, grain or equipment. Many horse owners scrimp and save to make sure that their animals have enough and that they are able to pay for all of these expenses. We have a budget and a little extra set aside for the horses. We know perfectly well that horses are expensive and give up a lot of other luxuries so we can have them.
But, I think it is unreasonable for people to expect any owner - no matter the animal - to forsee a three year drought that causes hay prices to skyrocket to $9 or more a bale - that is three times the normal cost! $3000 per year. For some, that can be quite a few mortgage payments. And, to make matters worse, the price of everything is increasing because of gas prices and the poor economy.
With dog and cat food, it is relatively easy to budget costs - I have yet to see dog food prices triple, even with all the recalls and demand for better food. But even if it did, I would not judge people for having to rehome their animals - at least they are asking for help instead of letting them starve to death.
Count your blessings if you have never had to rehome an animal because of a series of circumstances that were unavoidable (terminal sickness, death of a family member, loss of a job, severe mental illness, etc). Instead of judging people for getting rid of their animals, better to understand that they only want what is best for them, which is what any responsible owner strives for. Save the judgement for those irresponsible owners who deserve it.
I work at a zoo. Some of the horsemeat is also used in exotic animal feed. Beef and other meat is way more expensive, but we are having to switch to it because of this law. My sister in law is in the horse business and has no problem with the slaughter of horses that don't have jobs. How many dogs and cats are put down every year - and they are smaller and easier to house than a horse.
There are a lot of scenarios where a person can suddenly stop being able to afford their horses. Some are worthy of sympathy, and some are not. Regardless, there is no good excuse for sending your horse to slaughter the way things stand. I simply don’t buy the argument that there aren’t other “affordable” options.
It’s certainly the easiest option. It’s also the only option where you can MAKE money on an unwanted horse; I’m sure it’s a lot more palatable (for some) to pocket $200 at auction than actually SPEND $200 or more for a bullet and a backhoe, or a vet visit, or a trip to the rendering plant, cat sanctuary, or landfill. But the fact that the current slaughterhouse system inhumane for horses should be a bigger factor than the human’s discomfort or financial situation.
Until there’s horse-humane slaughter practices (trust me, I’m all for not wasting that protein. When my horse dies, he’s going to the big cat park in my state), sending horses to Mexican slaughterhouses is just another form of abuse.
Usually, I am totally appalled when people give up pets because they are moving, or they just don't want them anymore.
But a horse is a little different (which is why you rightly point out that folks have got to think carefully about the committment). A horse not only needs food, it needs space. You have to either own land or rent pasturing/stabeling - and if your property goes into foreclosure - the second alternative can be unaffordable over the long run.
Lots of pets are being abandoned for economic reasons now esp. with the foreclosures.
How can we help the horses (not by leading them over the border . . . )
I don't like the thought of horses being cruelly slaughtered, but an outright ban on the practice of horse slaughter seems to have the same negative effect as other bans, e.g. abortion, alchohol and drug comsumption, tobacco, etc., etc., etc.
I don't think it was Wayne Pacelle's (HSUS CEO) intention to be associated with Cary Nation ( the Prohibition promoter), but that's what I think of him right now. Has anyone at the HSUS actually lived in a farming area, except for attending some "upstate university" that the locals can't get into? What was the rationale for pushing the legislation to ban horse slaughter? A test case? Sanctuaries for horses? The HSUS did a great PR job with dogs and cats after Katrina hit New Orleans, but the organization seems oblivious to the problems of horses as a result of the the slaughter ban.
Where's the will and the MONEY to deal with horses that people can't take care of properly anymore? It's as difficult to plan for natural disasters as it is for economic downturns. If the HSUS could summon up the savvy to help the stranded pets of New Orleans, why can't it come up with some plan to help horse owners who are desperate as a result of its political activities?
Maybe it's time for the HSUS and Wayne Pacelle to get some negative publicity.
Any ideas?
Heather
Not to mention, at the time the law was enacted, the PMU farms had lost contracts and were already flooding and had flooded the market with horses.
HOWEVER, that said, I think that the prevention act will have long term benefits for horses in the US. There will be NO financial benefit to breeding and selling low-quality stock. Horses should diminish in the market- humane euthanasia will be the best option for disposal... people won't be able to make money off of the unfortunate unwanted horses.
You know, it's still legal to shoot a horse. An owner in dire straits can take the horse out back and (humanely) kill it with a bullet to the brain. In almost every book I have on horses there is a diagram showing you where to shoot to kill a horse that is suffering. You know the diagram, the head with the 'x marks the spot' to show you where to aim,.
my two cents
Very few horses are kept as simply companion animals. They have a job to do. That job can range from occasional weekend trail rides to competitive sports like racing or Grand Prix jumping. What do you do when little Suzy grows too big for her pony? Tell her tough. We can't afford another horse so you have to quit riding until Snowball dies of old age? Or do you sell snowball and buy a new horse. We don't do this with dogs or cats because their primary use is as companions. Injury, age, or ability doesn't really diminish their usefulness in that capacity.
If you have to put down a pony suffering from old age or an injured sport horse in the prime of life it's a very difficult decision that nobody takes lightly. But most horse-owners that I know just want a humane death. What happens to the remains is less important. Those who tell others to simply "plan ahead" know very little about the laws and regulations regarding the disposal of livestock. Some places simply don't allow it. In other areas it's nearly impossible due to geography or climate. Ever tried to dig a hole big enough for a 1,000 pound horse in frozen ground?
Space and feed requirements make keeping them in rescues a very expensive proposition. Because of previous slaughter bans the mustang population has grown to the point where the US Government is paying private landowners to care for herds of mustangs. They are doing their best to prevent breeding but the mustang birth rates are still far-exceeding adoptions. A well-regulated *humane* slaughter option is in the best interests of the taxpayers, the over-grazed land and the overall health of over-crowded herds. That would allow more resources for rescues and education.
Overall, though. I do believe that there is one small benefit from the ban. There will be no mare market for the backyard breeders that used to be perfectly happy to get $200 or $300 at auction for the poorly bred yearlings they keep pumping out just so they can "get some money back" from the horses they never actually use.
Here is a good local one I found:
http://www.defhr.org/farm/AboutTheFarm.htm
Robin,
It is very easy to sit up on a pedestal looking down at all the struggling people and pass judgement. You have no idea the circumstances anyone was in when the decision was made to purchase a horse. Nor what has transpired since. Maybe the owner is dying of cancer. Maybe the family had their savings wiped out caring for a sick child. Maybe a million other things. You have no idea.
There's a guy near here who has an exotic and big cat sanctuary. (Lion, tiger, panthers, etc.) Hmmmm... what to feed, what to feed.....
His phone number is on the bulletin board at the barn where I keep my horse. If I am able, I will donate my horse's remains to this guy when her time comes (after having her humanely dispatched).
Life's facts aren't always pretty. Just like the unintended consequences of the horse slaughter ban aren't pretty. The fact is, there just isn't enough money and land for horse sanctuaries.
Whether one is for or against slaughter per se I think more work could have been done to get ahead of the consequences--even it is was only having some mechanism for reliably quantifying them. The extent to which we deal with cat and dog population is at least somewhat recorded and tracked to allow the success and failure of various tactics to be determined amidts the overhead battle of ideologies (none of which matter much to any given animal except in what they cause us to *do*)
For those who have commented that we should plan ahead when taking on a horse, just as though we would if we had a cat or a dog, consider this - up here in Maine, we do not have a drought and we have enough land to set aside for hay. We like to be on the safe side and set aside *at least* a bale a day for each horse, since they would eat more in the winter and less in the summer (when they can graze).
Hay has been about $3 a bale up here. So, that would be about $1100 per horse per year. That doesn't include the cost of shoeing, vet care, emergency vet care, grain or equipment. Many horse owners scrimp and save to make sure that their animals have enough and that they are able to pay for all of these expenses. We have a budget and a little extra set aside for the horses. We know perfectly well that horses are expensive and give up a lot of other luxuries so we can have them.
But, I think it is unreasonable for people to expect any owner - no matter the animal - to forsee a three year drought that causes hay prices to skyrocket to $9 or more a bale - that is three times the normal cost! $3000 per year. For some, that can be quite a few mortgage payments. And, to make matters worse, the price of everything is increasing because of gas prices and the poor economy.
With dog and cat food, it is relatively easy to budget costs - I have yet to see dog food prices triple, even with all the recalls and demand for better food. But even if it did, I would not judge people for having to rehome their animals - at least they are asking for help instead of letting them starve to death.
Count your blessings if you have never had to rehome an animal because of a series of circumstances that were unavoidable (terminal sickness, death of a family member, loss of a job, severe mental illness, etc). Instead of judging people for getting rid of their animals, better to understand that they only want what is best for them, which is what any responsible owner strives for. Save the judgement for those irresponsible owners who deserve it.
It’s certainly the easiest option. It’s also the only option where you can MAKE money on an unwanted horse; I’m sure it’s a lot more palatable (for some) to pocket $200 at auction than actually SPEND $200 or more for a bullet and a backhoe, or a vet visit, or a trip to the rendering plant, cat sanctuary, or landfill. But the fact that the current slaughterhouse system inhumane for horses should be a bigger factor than the human’s discomfort or financial situation.
Until there’s horse-humane slaughter practices (trust me, I’m all for not wasting that protein. When my horse dies, he’s going to the big cat park in my state), sending horses to Mexican slaughterhouses is just another form of abuse.