Equine slaughter for human consumption in the US, when it was legal, used to be really unsafe for the people.  Often the horses going to slaughter came straight from an auction somewhere, and before the auction many of those horses had been working or pets somewhere (racetrack, Amish, horses stolen from private owners and sold at auction illegally, etc).  Almost everything we do for our working/pet horses has a warning label on it that says, "Not for use in animals intended for consumption."  These horses didn't exactly go to the meat buyers with a full health record, nor did they observe withdrawal periods appropriate for whatever the horse might have been given.  So, much of the meat coming out of those slaughterhouses was not at all fit for human consumption. it shouldn't have been sold as such.

I have an elderly, ailing horse.  We're doing our best to keep her quality of life up, but it's hard, and we'll have to let her go at some point.  I was just thinking last night that, though many horses are eaten around the world, there was no way that my beloved horse would ever go to slaughter. 

But I have the means and determination to make sure that she's okay for the rest of her life, and that she meets a peaceful end.  Do I have the right to tell other people that they can't do to their horse something that's perfectly acceptable for the Brangus cattle across the street?

People who opposed the horse slaughter ban, by the way, DID know (and say) that traffic to Canadian/Mexican slaughterhouses was going to increase.  A hundred thousand horses went to slaughter some years; rescues could not take a hundred thousand MORE horses per year than they already took, and people who were willing to send horses to slaughter were still going to sell them to whoever would buy them.  Horse slaughter used to be inhumane, yes.  It was horrible--the travel to the slaughterhouse, the methods of slaughter, the callousness of the employees for any suffering horse--and it wasn't something I'd ever subject a horse to.  But it hasn't stopped.  It's worse than it used to be.

Stealing someone's horse to eat it, though, that's downright mean.  Especially when they don't even try to hide what they're doing (the first case I knew of, they took the horse out of the pasture and simply led him across the street, then slaughtered/butchered him).  And yeah, those horses aren't fit for human consumption either, bt somehow I doubt the thieves care :(

Galadriel July 29th, 2009 11:08:29 AM

I disagree with the AVMA position.

I have been told by those supporting this bill that the assertion that there are not adequate rescues for these animals is false, but rather that the proponents of slaughter are making sure that these horses don't make it to sanctuary.

Why would I believe them without proof that they are telling the truth?  What's the alternative -- believe the slaughter/sale profiteers and the AVMA?

I know who I deem more credible.  And it's sure not the crowd that runs about shouting the proposterous claim that HSUS is secretly out to end the practice of having "pets."

Killing is always the lazy answer and the question is nearly always disingenuous.  If we accepted that the killing of horses is unnacceptable, then we would find a solution for the remaining challenge of finding a place for them. 

Stefani July 29th, 2009 11:26:44 AM

Zoos are suffering because of the lack of horsemeat available in the US.  Horsemeat was an afordable protein for carnivores.  Feeding carnivores like big cats, vultures, etc. is much more expensive in a time when money coming into zoos from grants, donations, and gate reciepts are down.

teri July 29th, 2009 11:40:12 AM

I'm confused by number 3 on your list...

Because people commit really, truly evil heinous crimes...horse slaughter should be legal so immigrants can eat our pets?

In some countries people eat dog. Are you for eating them as well? Why are they different?

Sheyna July 29th, 2009 11:40:49 AM

FWIW,  the bill currently being backed by HSUS (which is cosponsored by both my Senators), the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, is intended to stop the transport of horses across the border to those unquestionably horrible conditions and slaughter.  I don't doubt that its even worse than US slaughter, not to mention the transport stress -- but that IS one of the main goals of the current bill, is to stop them from being exported for this purpose.

The loophole being it criminalizes "knowingly" transporting for slaughter, so I'm sure we will see a huge rise in horse sanctuaries just over the border in Canada and Mexico which subsequently sell the horses to slaughter -- there will need to be some other bill for that!

Stefani July 29th, 2009 11:51:25 AM

Sheyna: My point is that IF there's a market for horse meat within the US, a black market will flourish in the absence of legal avenues. This kind of market cares little for humane treatment. We've created conditions for nasty people to do nasty work. I'm arguing that the demand for horse meat exists, particularly in certain communities, and the black market is one of several unintended consequences of the US majority's distaste for horse meat.

Dr. Patty Khuly July 29th, 2009 12:01:08 PM

Stefani, if you want proof that there isn't anywhere for equine overflow to go, try this:

Go to <a href="http://www.netpets.org/horses/horsresc/horsgrp.html">this listing of horse rescue groups by state</a>--or any other, as long as you're calling legit rescues.  Find a couple near you.  Call them up and ask them if they have room for a few owner turnins.  (Try not to be upset when they laugh at you.)  Independent rescues rely on donations, by the way, and those have taken a sharp downturn along with everything else.  Even if they have the space--and no rescue I know ever has any space--they don't have the funds.

The selling price of horses has dropped dramatically in the past few years.  Horses can be found virtually free (or entirely free).  There are so many horses with no place to go that you often can't GIVE one away.

Accepting that the killing of horses is unacceptable is very different from a nanny state legislating something that they can't enforce, not when there are people who think it's perfectly okay to sell their horse to the highest bidder, or whoever walks up with cash.  It would be nice to say "it's unacceptable to kill horses, and it won't happen anymore."  That's unfortunately unrealistic.  If we want to prevent equine slaughter, we need programs and assistance in place FIRST to take all those horses that will be, essentially, dumped (sold to whoever will buy them--often the meat buyer).  Starting with the ban on slaughter doesn't stop people from dumping their horses, nor does it prevent the meat buyer from purchasing horses.

When someone has a dog they refuse to care for anymore, they may dump it at a dog pound.  When someone has a horse they refuse to care for anymore, they sell him to whoever will buy him.  They don't get much from the meat buyer, but they no longer have the horse.

~ ~ ~

If there were government supported shelters that could take horses, maybe people wouldn't sell to the meat buyer, but dump at the pound.  Of course, what happens to a dog at the pound if he doesn't get adopted?  So then, what happens to a horse at the pound if he doesn't get adopted?  Wait, weren't we trying to <i>prevent</i> killing horses?

Galadriel July 29th, 2009 12:58:23 PM

There is a market for many things...babies, drugs, organs. The crime should be punished not made more accessible.

I'm a Fuglyhorse blog addict, I have to say I have been swayed by her very reasoned argument. The problem is that people breed too many horses for the market to support not that we don't kill enough.

She says it better and more cogently with more words.

It is a big problem though.

Sheyna July 29th, 2009 01:15:37 PM

You ask what happens to the horse that doesn't get adopted.

Which would you prefer, to be euthanized as "pets" are, or put through the slaughter system?

I know which I would pick.  If you are right and there is no getting around the excess of horses, I would still argue that if we are forced into killing, (and I really think that is still a bit of a lie -- lack of creative thinking) then I would rather see them euthanized. 

Of course this doesn't stop the crazy theif horse killers, but I don't buy the argument that this type of crime is the result of the domestic slaughter ban.  We wouldn't buy that argument if people from countries that eat dog moved here and started stealing and killing people's dogs because dogs aren'st slaughtered for food here. 

Stefani July 29th, 2009 01:53:19 PM

Sick bastards abound (and always have), and a number of them look to work in slaughterhouses.  The problem is the treatment of animals that end up being used for food/eggs.  It doesn't matter if the food is meant for people or other animals, it should be 'made' with more care and concern than it is. 

Loading/transporting animals to slaughterhouses is almost always done with little to no care or concern.  Unloading and holding is not done with care and concern.  Driving them through the chutes and killing them is never done with care and concern.  Processing them (many times not completely dead yet) isn't done with care and concern for the end consumer, let alone the animal itself.  The whole proces is repugnant.

However, people will continue to eat meat (I do, to a small degree), and so many other animals in our care absolutely require meat as food.  With this known fact, perhaps we should have more slaughterhouses - but with different processes of how the animals are handled before and after they are dead.  As Galadriel pointed out - a vital process to reform is the knowledge of drugs, feeds, and supplements that an animal has ingested and whether they can even be used for food. 

I absolutely hate seeing trucks full of cows (what I've seen the most) and pigs overheated and scared going god-knows-where on a journey of god-knows-how-long, without water, cool air, or even minimum comfort.  However, if I knew the journey was less than 100 miles (actually, I'd prefer 50), and the facility was clean, and gave some shelter from the elements and had sound-proofed walls, and had workers who weren't sickos, then I'd support slaughterhouses. 

Of course, then we come down to the other major problem - the NIMBY one.  That one I have no suggestions that I think could even work.  Sad when fixing the horrible side of the issue would be easier then the 'civilized' side.

KateH July 29th, 2009 02:43:13 PM

With Stefani and Sheyna on this. Capitulation to horse slaughtering in order to better regulate it does nothing to contain horse overpopulation or disincentivize their lack of care, disposability and killer profiteers. And if you trust governmental regulation of the way stock/farmed/lab animals are treated, you're in la-la-land.

oh holland July 29th, 2009 02:49:15 PM

Got to disagree on this one. 

#1) the economy has tanked however, contrary to "news" reports that all seem to trace to one or two folks (one in KY, one in CO) there are NOT more cruelty, neglect or abandonments now than there were a few years ago.  the accessibility to local slaughterhouses made not one whit of difference in whether someone took responsibility for care of their animal.  rescues offering low cost or free euthenasia have very few takers as most horse owners (ESPECIALLY those who are still breeding) think their "product" has value and/or are angry that you would suggest their animal should die.  they do NOT want their animal dead.  they just no longer want it themselves.  they FIRMLY believe in the myth that there are lots of homes for pasture puffs and that their horse will find it.  what HAS happened is that adoption rates are down, down, down so rescues aren't turning over what they have.  not more influx, less outflow.

#2) horses were in fact previously sent to Canada and Mexico even when we had US slaughterhouses.  shippers want to maximize profits.  the closest place is where they went.

#3) well, someone else said it better than i.  illegal slaughter locally has nothing to do with whether or not there are slaughterhouses in the US.

it is worth noting that kill buyers do NOT (or are not supposed to) under current law accept lame/injured animals, pregnant mares or foals under a certain age. its not profitable (skinny horses have no meat, foals are small, preg mares a foal who makes their weight per pound "off") and therefore opening slaughterhouses in the US won't help that segment of the horse population who is starving. 

also, zoos, hunt clubs and big cat sanctuaries ARE overfull.  most are turning down horses because owners like the thought of having the horse put down immediately without group transport and the meat being used.

someone also noted, correctly, that horses in the US are by law required to have current vaccinations, etc that make the meat toxic. 

if horse slaughter is to be legal in this country, then for animals as difficult to transport and kill as they are we need small local "knackers" like they have in europe, and we need the law changed to allow the horses to be weaned off supplements and drugs that should not be eaten. 

horses don't transport like cattle, pigs, sheep or other livestock.  they have more fragile legs especially in regards to their body mass and weight distribution.  their "kill range" on their brain is more difficult to hit and their temperment and range of motion on their neck is such that attempting to use a bolt or bullet in a situation where the horse is panicking is nigh impossible.  truly localized slaughter is the only humane option i can support.

i am unsure why the AVMA isn't aware of these issues......  though its worth noting that none of the equine vets i know personally support the AVMA position.

Beth Patterson July 29th, 2009 04:01:19 PM

Zoos do not have enough horse meat. They are turning to more expensive beef or imported horse meat. This is from 2007. I would think it's worse now. But maybe I'm wrong. Somehow I think zoos might be turning away horses because they really don't know how to slaughter them. And, like you and me, they're happy to care for animals...not kill them, even if they're not vegetarians themselves, even if it's going to feed their own creatures.

Dr. Patty Khuly July 29th, 2009 04:21:23 PM

oh holland said it best! People that are allowing their horses or livestock to languish and starve are not pet-owners, nor are the horses valued as such.

The horse-owners that have care and have compassion would seek humane euthanasia, not look for a $, nor attempt blind give-aways.

A friend from Canada raised on a farm (years ago) told me sick livestock was brought to the woods, shot, with carcass left to feed the wild-life predators.

Not that I have checked recently, but is horsemeat still available in canned dog food?

Barbara A./NH July 29th, 2009 04:58:58 PM

Vaccines don't make meat "toxic" any more than the vaccines our cows and pigs and chickens receive make their meat "toxic." The idea behind a vaccine is to elicit a biological response, one which may have deleterious consequences for the individual animal but would almost never rise to the level of a food safety issue––even in horses, where vaccines have not necessarily been investigated specifically in terms of human safety.

Antibiotic (and other drug) administration, however, is another issue. It's difficult to ascertain with any certainty that a horse submitted for slaughter does not retain trace amounts of these drugs in its muscle mass. Hence, the idea that this meat is best reserved for alternative protein uses and for export to places where the restrictions on antibiotics and other drugs are more lax seems more realistic. 

Dr. Patty Khuly July 29th, 2009 06:05:39 PM

And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with your point, Beth, that slaughter is best done locally and on the premises. Sure, it will almost certainly bring you a lower price per pound to prove your horse has no drug residues and have someone come out to do the deed, but it solves the problem of unwanted horses, creates local markets, minimizes traumatic shipping, etc. This is especially true especially because it's my view that a humane slaughter at the hands of experienced personnel in an at-home setting can be every bit as humane as a euthanasia. In fact, that's how I'd like to see all slaughter undertaken, not just for horses. 

Dr. Patty Khuly July 29th, 2009 06:12:39 PM

At my great grandparents' farm, we named many of the livestock and kept them as pets right up until it was time to slaughter and eat them.  I don't see a bright line between "livestock" and "pet" nor do I see the sense in wasting resources by burying or burning what could be food (or research material, or a rug, etc., etc.).  In our wealth as a country, we've gotten quite arrogant in our wasteful ways the past couple of generations.

Horses ARE going to be slaughtered for food and this is the pragmatic solution, at least for now.  Yes, there's a market for organs, babies, etc.  To me, it's a matter of priorities on that level.  And I'm not the least bit ashamed to say that dealing with trafficking of human children and organs is higher on my priority list than convincing people they shouldn't eat horse meat.  Just how is horse meat different from beef (other than being higher in protein)?  I disapprove of stealing them but, if an owner chooses to sell them for slaughter, then OK.

Dogs (and quite a few other species) ARE slaughtered daily for food in these great United States and our territories.  If a person wants to bury or cremate their animal, I support their right to do so.  However, I think it is indeed wasteful.  Humane slaughter after a good life for the benefit of another falls under the ashes to ashes, waste not, want not, and a number of other long standing and very logical sentiments against being wanton and wasteful and arrogant.  We'd be well served not to attempt to impose our puritanical views on others but to change to the broader views the majority of the world holds in many cases.

As for what's currently going on in Florida...  People are getting desperate.  I expect it will get much worse before it gets better because we've boxed so many humans into no win situations with our puritanical views.

PJBoosinger July 29th, 2009 07:06:07 PM

Based on what Kate said, anyone who thinks they are being slaughtered "humanely" even when it is done on US soil is kidding themselves.

Since we're admitting our biases here, I will admit that although I am concerned about improving both the lives and the method of slaughter for all animals raised for food, I believe that some animals are "more equal than others," to steal a phrase.  The dog, the cat, the horse -- these we have domesticated, and as the Little Prince said, you become responsible forever for what you have tamed. 

Without the horse, would we ever have settled the West?  The horse has been crucial to human society and civilization.  I believe we owe them more than just a discussion about how to best meet the goal of necessary slaughter.  I believe we owe them sincere efforts to find alternatives to that fate. 

Imagine: The money that gets pumped into this debate on both sides, instead goes to setting up and supporting sanctuaries and care.  Think what the lobbies are spending on this.  Think of what good that money could do.  And what about us? What if instead of posting her on Dolittler, all of us make a contribution to or volunteer at a horse rescue.  If we put as much effort into fixing the problem as into fighting about it . . . a much better solution might no longer be a mere naiive pipe dream. 

Bottom line, people are lazy, and killing is easy, and so is lying to ourselves about the nature of the killing that is done out of sight.  The situation before the domestic slaughter ban wasn't happy horses trotting off to painless humane deaths.  It won't be, and as for naiive, I think it's way more naiive (or perhaps deliberately maintained delusion) to think that slaughter ever will be brought up to a humane level -- at least not for horses, for the good reasons several have stated here.

Stefani July 29th, 2009 07:33:08 PM

Dr. Khuly,

Even if thew equine slaughterhouse operations are allowed to reopen, this Miami debacle will continue.  Why, you might ask?  To put it simply, regardless of where slaughterhouses are located, horses are not designated for human consumption in the US.  This means a black market for horse meat will remain viable.  This blog, http://fuglyhorseoftheday.blogspot.com/, has been following the news stories pertaining to the Maimi horse killers as well as the shutdown of slaughter plants.

To me, this is a problem of overbreeding which mirrors that seen in dog and cats.  Worse, though, is that even big name breeders are contributing en masse to the problem.  Breeding semi-quality horses en-masse to produce a few gems is simply no longer economical when you can't sell the culls down the river for as much as you used to.  As far as I'm concerned, it hasn't gone far enough.  The transport fo US horses to other countries for slaughter should also be made illegal, especially when there are programs in place to aid those looking to euthanize a horse.  Several rescues are running 'euthanization clinics' where they will even pick the horse up to get it to the clinic- and this is all at no cost to the owner.  There is also a program in which a rescue subsidizes a large portion of the cost of at-home euthanasia by a local vet.  The HSUS has also released some sources of help in obtaining affordable horse euthanasia and disposal, http://www.hsus.org/horses_equines/resources/.

For those who keep an intact male (stallion) and are interested in gelding but don't have the funds, I know of more than one program that will give you a voucher for a portion of the cost of gelding.  http://stalliontogeldingsupport.org/

There is no reason to continue to allow US horses to be slaughtered in the US, or to allow them to be transferred beyond the borders of the country.

Jen July 29th, 2009 09:00:06 PM

"Without the horse, would we ever have settled the West?" Hm, "we" must be the Europeans since the "West" was actually settled long, long before Columbus brought the horses (and donkeys).  Some of "us" would call it theft and genocide rather than "settling".  Yes, "killing is easy"; understanding and compromise between cultures, not so much.

For purposes of this law, I wonder if donkeys are considered a subspecies of horse or a separate species.

PJBoosinger July 29th, 2009 09:27:17 PM

I agree with both with PJBoosinger & Dr. Khuly.  Thank you for being honest.  I also read Fugly's blog daily but do not agree with everything stated.  The zoos and people who want horse meat need a legal market to purchase this "forbidden" commodity.  And I am a horse lover first and foremost.  My two horses were buried with with dignity when their end came.  But others do not have the means/funds, etc. and need an outlet.  Let us not let it go to waste or put the horses through the horrors in Mexico!

Holly July 29th, 2009 09:33:19 PM

Thank God someone east of the Mississippi River has some common sense on this issue!  It's time that HSUS' true nature as a well-cloaked extremist animal rights and NOT animal welfare organization is revealed.  Although I agree your last reason (i.e. horse meat as a wasted protein source) might be a lot harder to convince most folks, outlawing horse slaughter does indeed force unwanted horses into Mexico, directly into horror situations.  Guess what, folks? Unwanted horses are a significant issue and not going away any time soon.  In a large part of the country, horses are not just pets, they are working animals and farm tools.  They need to go somewhere.  The horses are owned by common sense people, people who recognize the cost of an animal and efficient disposal.  As I said, these are not pets.  The regulators in charge of national regulation need to travel out of the beltway and off the east coast (where I grew up) to where unwanted horses are choking ranchers and those in the equine rescue business. 

We absolutely need horse slaughter facilities in the US-- well-regulated, safe facilities similar to those in Canada.

Thank you Dr. Khuly, for bringing this to the attention of your wide audience and providing a balanced, objective point of view to the issue. 

Equinevettech in TX July 29th, 2009 10:29:06 PM

I can't believe you would support this act of violence & cruelty to such noble creatures. the hardship & trauma alone through round ups, the cramped trailor ride in extremem tempatures, no food, rest or water for long distance traveling- then to be stabbed to be papralized- and while still alive hung up by their back legs and carved up! these trucks -and doble deckers have carred horses to be also in disasters traffic wrecks- these animals suffer horriably so some s o b's can make a bundle of dough from cruel mis treatment of another life . people who support slaughter , for meat, fur,   should be put to the same experiences these poor frightened animals are made to endure before their death...I am unsubscribing  from your website- I will not be a part of such acceptance from such a person who supports such ugly greedy acts as this. I am ashamed of you. death & killing is not the answer!

carol July 29th, 2009 11:03:53 PM

Carol, take a chill pill. You must have just subscribed if this is your reaction to a well-reasoned postion on a sad and distaseful problem concerning animals. We all know that slaughter is not a pretty picture, for any animal, but to to say that "people who support slaughter , for meat, fur, should be put to the same experiences these poor frightened animals are made to endure before their death" is a sad and distasteful comment on your part.

(Oh, and PJ, it was the Spaniards who brought the horse back to the Americas, not Columbus. :) no offense meant)

KateH July 29th, 2009 11:43:32 PM

Hey, Dr. K. (or the support guru), thanks for taking the annoying foreign language spam crapper out of the comments - does this mean it will happen more often?  I'm sure we'd all really like it gone.

KateH July 29th, 2009 11:46:32 PM

PJ- even if slaughter is again allowed on US soil, the human consumption of horsemeat in the US would remain, as before the ban, illegal.

Also. before the ban I believe only one, maybe two, plants operated in the US.  I believe the one in TX shut down before the ban was enacted, therefore only the IL facility was still active at the time the ban was put in place.

The double decker transport is also an issue.  You cannot humanely transport horses in a double decker.  In fact, even on single-level trailers I fail to see how you can transport horses of all genders and age groups humanely sans dividers (stallions with stallions with mares and yearlings??  The resulting injuries are well documented).

If I truly thought humane slaughter was a possibility, I might be open to it.  Frankly, horses are not an economical or practical meat animal.  Too prone to painful injuries, not practical in mass transport, commonly given drugs not available to meat animals, not regulated as a meat animal.  For instance, I have no idea what the withdrawal period is for DMSO which is used as a solvent in paper manufacturing but is also commonly used in horses (sold at every feed store I've been in).  This doesn't even touch on other drugs used legally or off-label in equines.

Additionally, the page I posted listing resources for owners looking for affordable euthanasia or disposal options that was put together by the HSUS in no way shows them as extremists.  This is a useful resource giving alternatives to slaughter.  It provides affordable options to those who don't want to send their horse to auction/slaughter.

Jen July 30th, 2009 12:09:44 AM

"Oh, and PJ, it was the Spaniards who brought the horse back to the Americas, not Columbus. :) no offense meant"  None taken.  Christopher Columbus, funded by Spain, already appointed governor of the Americas he'd discovered, brought the horses and donkeys to the Americas, along with the Spanish conquistadors, settlers, supplies, etc (17 ships worth).  Columbus made it to South America on his third trip and to Central America on his fourth; those mercenary conquistadors along with him each time.  It was the Conquistadors who brought the descendants of these horses and donkeys from South America up into North America; although it was more donkeys than horses and those horses are not like the ones we have these days.  Those horses were mostly pack animals, not so different from their donkey counterparts.  Oh, and those Conquistadors didn't have problems eating their donkeys or horses if times were lean.

Notably, good old Chris whom we celebrate every year, headed back from his second trip with 500 slaves from the Americas for use in Spain.  Slaving was a two way ship.

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 02:36:56 AM

If you have the stomach for it, there are some photos from an American slaughterhouse on the Habitat for Horses website.  

http://www.habitatforhorses.org/joincampaigns/slaughterhouse.html

Devan July 30th, 2009 03:45:29 AM

"even if slaughter is again allowed on US soil, the human consumption of horsemeat in the US would remain, as before the ban, illegal" Hm, what was I saying about intolerance of other cultural preferences? Oh, yeah, we're pretty intolerant of them in these great United States. Thanks for proving my point. If I were in India, I'd be asking: "Where's the beef?" The difference being India doesn't claim to be tolerant and leader of the "free" world. Free world indeed. I guess it is if one is of exclusively European descent and provincial in attitude.

More to the point, I've seen that "it's illegal to eat horsemeat" tossed out there.  Really?  Are you sure?  It is illegal in California and slaughter for sale is illegal but the eating part...  Are you sure I can't slaughter and eat my own horse quite legally?  I do indeed think I can.

Barb, from what I've read, horsemeat hasn't been used much in dog food since WWII; too expensive.  HOWEVER, make no mistake that rendered animals (including dogs, cats, horses, raccoons, skunks, rats, and roadkill) are in our pets' food, our food, our cosmetics and soaps, and...

If you ask me, animals slaughtered pursuant to some regulation is better than decaying roadkill, rotting corpses from kill shelters, poisoned ones from vet euthanasias... - that's what's in the rendered products pervasive in our comfy lives.  (Jeez, I don't like some of what I find when I go off hunting after reading something here sometimes.  Yeah, some of it just revives hidden stuff from my pre-stroke days like this one did but I think I could stand some of those brain cells staying hidden/dead.)

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 04:25:44 AM

Devan, I'm so glad I didn't grow up in such a protected bubble that gross pictures freak me out.  Pictures are just pictures; these used for their shock value when splashed to those who grew up in the bubbles just as gross abortion pictures are used to horrify young women who are already traumatized by unexpected pregnancy.  I remember when the 7 dirty words would shock people.  They're just words now and even good old George didn't try the "really" dirty words that still elicit shock and horror for some.  You can probably still be jailed in many places for the "N" word or, more likely G** D***.

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 04:47:05 AM

Hey Dr. K,

Lets kill all unwanted animals.  That seems to be your theme here from feral cats to homeless horses. 

......... July 30th, 2009 09:51:37 AM

If horse racing were treated like grey hound racing and pressure was applied to make it illegal, much of the excess horse population would be eliminated.

Robert Garnett July 30th, 2009 11:00:02 AM

Speaking from Canada, there are committed groups here that are working to have the slaughter of horses banned in this country too. Many of us Canadians are absolutley appalled that Canada has become the go-to country for horsemeat. I apologize on behalf of all of us. 

There are many arguments on both sides, but I maintain that it is morally and ethically wrong to slaughter this species, which most of us do not regard as food, and profit from selling the meat to those who do. I don't see arguments in favour of dog slaughterhouses, and we know that many dogs are also living/dying in extremely poor circumstances. I also maintain that if you can afford to own a horse in the first place -- not an inexpensive proposition -- you can afford humane euthanization. In my community, for about $200 the "knacker" will come, euth a horse (using a bolt gun rather than injection; it's a good, quick death administered by an expert) and truck the body away for rendering.

Once there is no easy way for people to dispose of their unwanted horses by simply dropping them off at the auction and deluding themselves that Clover will get a good home elsewhere, and in the process make a few bucks, the horse population is bound to adjust to a manageable level. It will take time.

Deb July 30th, 2009 12:12:26 PM

PJ, Columbus did not bring the conquistadors (Balboa, Cortes, Pizarro, Alvarado y Contreras, Orenella, & de Vaca, as prime examples).  Balboa sailed for Hispaniola in 1500, but not with Columbus.  Pizarro sailed to Hispaniola in 1502, anddid not go with Columbus.  Columbus was back in Spain, permanently and in disgrace, in 1504.  Cortes sailed to Hispaniola later in 1504.  Alvardo sailed to Hispaniola in 1510. Orenella wasn't even born until maybe 1511, and de Vaca didn't sail (for Florida) until 1527.

Columbus may have had a few horses and donkeys with him, but to say it was those horses who became the stock from which American (North, Central, & South) got their horses (and the mustangs loose in the western states today) is not correct.  Those horses did come with the conquistadors, later on and were taken much further inland than Columbus ever went (his ventures to South & Central America were very coastal in nature).

And your comment to Devan was unecessary and rude.  If she felt it might help someone understand - through visual documentation - the actual awfulness of a slaughterhouse, she wasn't trying to just shock people.  And shocking pictures do have immense value to help people make connections to acts of horror, joy, sadness, and awe.  There are too many instances where a picture really is worth a thousand words.  (And the add-on about the 'dirty' words was pointless.)

Also, Dr. K., just ignore the .... wuss.  Keep writing about topics that make people (or could, if they had the guts and the brains) to think about more than one side of an issue.  I value your opinions, whether I agree with them or not.  Oh, and can we get the ed hardy spam crap taken off too?

KateH July 30th, 2009 01:41:23 PM

Deb-

"I also maintain that if you can afford to own a horse in the first place -- not an inexpensive proposition -- you can afford humane euthanization. In my community, for about $200 the "knacker" will come, euth a horse (using a bolt gun rather than injection; it's a good, quick death administered by an expert) and truck the body away for rendering."

I strongly agree and desperately wish this were true, that people took into consideration the cost of at the end of useful life for horses, and that only those that can guarantee financial security throughout the horse's life should own, let alone breed horses.  It is not. Plain and simple.  Wishing away the problem won't solve it. 

Robert Garnett-

"If horse racing were treated like grey hound racing and pressure was applied to make it illegal, much of the excess horse population would be eliminated"

Unwanted horses are not exclusively, or even primarily, racehorses.  The horses for slaughter are bought at auction, where yes, there are racehorses, but many are other types of performance horses, former ranch horses and pleasure horses alike.  They have reached the end of their useful life with their previous owners and brought to auction to return on an investment.  If I were to follow your logic, I would think that all performance work for horses (e.g. racing, cutting, etc.) should be banned, because they promote overbreeding.  Is this what you were thinking, or were you using this issue to promote an anti-racing agenda?

Jen-

 "Additionally, the page I posted listing resources for owners looking for affordable euthanasia or disposal options that was put together by the HSUS in no way shows them as extremists. This is a useful resource giving alternatives to slaughter. It provides affordable options to those who don't want to send their horse to auction/slaughter."

 I wasn't referring to your list, I believe that if the owner is willing and able to seek alternatives, GOOD! I was moreso referring to HSUS becoming a misunderstood extremist animal welfare organization with a virulent lobbyist agenda and a kick-a** marketing team.  See this site: http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/184 .  If this was taken up by an animal welfare organization, and not an organization hell-bent on eliminating production agriculture and meat as a protein source in the US, myself and many others in the large animal field would be more inclined to their reasoning.

Equinevettech in TX July 30th, 2009 02:46:21 PM

KateH, I think you've bought into the romanticized version of conquistadors.  I'm sure they did bring horses with them as well on their own voyages but it doesn't change that Columbus brought both horses and conquistadors with him several years earlier or that Columbus reached the mainland of the Americas in 1498.  "Columbus was back in Spain, permanently and in disgrace, in 1504"  Yep, along with his 2 brothers :)  "were taken much further inland"  Well, yeah, that's how exploration works...  Someone gets there first and others follow and push further on.  To disregard the first horses and donkeys as part of the foundation stock is equally unfair.

Balboa did tag along on someone else's expedition in 1500, settled in Hispaniola in 1502.  After failing as a planter and pig farmer, he returned to Spain.  In 1509, he stowed away on another expedition to escape his creditors back home...  Again, just how exploration generally works; fully of shady characters.  Most who took such risks did so because they had little to lose and much to gain; mostly shady characters we've since romanticized for their horrendous actions.

I second the ignore the wuss comment!  Hey wuss, you gutless wonder, come back and post some kind of nom de guerre!

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 02:50:53 PM

PJ, I do not have a 'romanticized view' of the conquistidors.  I do not think that genocide is romantic, nor that these men were 'heroic' figures in any way.  Sure, they had big ones to make the journeys that they did, but their actions while on those journeys were mostly the acts of bullying killers with selfish personal, let alone national agendas (conversion of souls and accumlation of riches/titles).

They most certainly brought horses, donkeys, goats, and cattle with them (transportation/pack animals and food), and they brought them in far greater numbers than Columbus did.  You seem to want to give Columbus more credit than he is due for the exploration and conquering of the Americas.  Yes, he was 'discovered' the New World (actually the Vikings got there first - after the Siberians) with a laudable goal to increase trade and prove he was a great commander, but he was a horrible racist (yeah, they pretty much all were) and his delusions of grandeur were epic.  Trying to increase his impact and downplaying the men who came after him is ridiculous.

And now there's the stupid shoe spammers! 

KateH July 30th, 2009 03:14:41 PM

I'm only saying he (Columbus) brought the first horses (and that only holds true if they were indeed extinct in the Americas which is disputed too).  Beyond that, I'm far more inclined to pass around blame than credit with this bunch of men.  Yes, men!  :)

Do they really think we'll buy their shoes after they've annoyed us to death?

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 03:42:27 PM

To ........  Let's not resort to that line of thinking. I'd like to see YOU do more than your share of the heavy lifting before you start pointing fingers at someone who DOES. And, of course, I have no idea what you actually contribute since your name is spelled in punctuation marks. How do you pronounce that, anyway?

Dr. Patty Khuly July 30th, 2009 03:55:04 PM

The slaughterhouses that were closed in the US---two were in Texas and one was in Illiinois---had very little business from the majority of the states in the US. During the time they were in operation, countless horses were still being shipped to Canada for slaughter (I do not know about Mexico, but am thinking that probably not so many as now, since the Texas slaughter houses probably got the majority of those). Here in Washington State we have several active feedlots where horses bought at auction by killer buyers lanquish until they are shipped to Canada for slaughter. I am sure the same goes for Oregon, California, Montana, etc, where a lot of horses are owned and ultimately disposed of in some manner or another when their owners decide they don't want them anymore.  There are organizations present that attempt to get the horses off of the feedlots and into good homes before they are shipped and they have a pretty good success rate.

I am opposed to horse slaughter in this country and any other until it can be proven to be humane. Horses are not cattle and the slaughter process that works fine for cattle does not work well for a nervous, terrified animal with a long supple neck. However, they were never treated any differently and were "processed" in the same manner as cattle, resulting in some pretty horrifying and gruesome deaths. Horses are highly perceptive and have an amazingly strong flight reflex when they sense danger. They smell blood, hear screams...they know they are going to die and will practically kill themselves and anyone around them trying to get away.

Also, transportation of horses does not fall under the same government guidelines as does the transportation of traditional meat animals. They are not included in the regulations that govern how many animals can be loaded in a truck, water stops, rest stops, etc. And, has been previously mentioned, the huge double decker carriers that IMO are dubiously humane for cattle and pigs are a nightmare for horses. Packing horses into that kind of carrier without regard for whether they are foals, mares in foal (yes they are shipped too), stallions, geldings, sick, previously injured or aggressive is the ultimate in inhumanity to these creatures---it makes the already horrific slaughter process seem kind. Horses arrive at the feedlot, with broken limbs, gouged eyes or simply dead. I guess it doesn't matter to some since they are going to be killed anyway, but to me this whole slaughter thing is the ultimate betrayal of trust to animals who against all of their better instincts have given their trust over to us---a known predator. If you have ever seen horses standing in a feedlot you would understand. Some know and have just given up---you can see their hoplessness. Others keep watching over the fence...waiting. They know their person will come for them and I am sure they keep that hope up until their last seconds on this earth.

I, as opposed to some, do walk the walk. I have adopted two feedlot horses and am sure there are more in my future. I also give regularly to local rescue groups.

I also know that horses are mortal and yes, they do die. I also know that they are expensive and in hard times and any other times, it sometimes becomes impossible for some people to keep them. It is no different than with cats and dogs, except that there are few resources for horse owners to turn to. I also know that zoos need horsemeat. Humane slaughter, affordable euthanasia and active rescuse and rehoming need to be part of the picture. What used to be and what is now are simply not acceptable.

khatti

khatti July 30th, 2009 04:49:13 PM

Equinevettech, I found the information in the link you included in your post interesting.  It is true HSUS has taken some heat from contributors for not providing much direct sheltering care to animals, and when I learned this I began donating more to rescues and less to them.  However, I personally agree with most of their lobbying campaigns (that's where we diverge) and someone's gotta do it. 

I do believe that they have changed in teh last 5 years for the better.  I specifically know one person they have hired who is passionately leading efforts to investigate/shut down/rescue animals from hoarding, puppy mills, and disasters.  They have improved in this area. 

As for the final point on the site, about the USDA -- if you ever were involved with any animal advocacy endeavor, you would understand a) why the HSUS kept their investigation under cover for so long, b) why they were very specific about the terms for releasing the evidence and wanting to be in control of the involvemetn of USDA and other governement authorities.

Having had a State Government official make statements to me that I believe were knowingly and deliberately false in an attempt to avoid having to enforce a specific regulation under the agency's purview, I undersand in a very real way that foxes are guarding the proverbial henhouse when it comes to EVERYTHING that involves government and animals - especially where commerce/business/profit is involved.

I am sure HSUS has Dept of Ags number, and BLM's too.  It's not that hard to figure out.

Stefani July 30th, 2009 04:49:26 PM

"animals who against all of their better instincts have given their trust over to us"  That statement I'll take issue with.  Unless you have no fencing, no containment, we humans have domesticated them and they have not "given" themselves into our hands.

And just generally on humane death, although many don't think livestock and animals are treated to a humane end, it is worth noting that they are provided with far more protection than humans who do not even get the option of a humane death or slaughter.  Again, not ashamed to say that humane deaths for humans higher on my priority list than that for animals.  Further, I think the two issues are quite closely related as I think it highly unlikely we'll be humane to other species until we learn to be so with each other...  Indigent patient dumping in LA; Homeless of NY being transported "elsewhere" by the government (some apparently shipped off to sunny Florida)...

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 05:08:21 PM

Why shouldn't we eat "pets"? If I keep a beef cow in my yard, I feed it, I care for it, it trusts me and when it hits a certin weight I slaughter it.How is that any different than eating a horse? It is not that we eat it but how we care for it and how we kill it. I don't understand this idea that some animals are different than others because we keep them as pets. I LOVE dogs, I can't hunt cyotes as a result, does that mean I think all coyote hunting should be outlawed, that would be stupid. If someone enjoys it and the population can sustain it why not allow it. It would be incrediably selfish of me to say that because I can't shoot a canid you can't either. Animals are animals, the wild rabit that I hunt with my hawk is the same as your pet rabbit. The wild horse on the range is the same as a pet horse and the beef animal in my back yard is the same as the animal on the farm. I can understand that someone wouldn't want to slaughter an animal they have cared for,but don't tell me I can't, that is just selfish and rude. <br>

Jacob L'Etoile<br>

PS : Props to PJ.

jacob L'Etoile July 30th, 2009 06:09:47 PM

khatti: We should put an end to inhumane slaughter. God knows I would never buy horseflesh from the kind of equine slaughterhouses we used to see in the US––even if it were legal. But then, I don't buy any kind of meat from the factory-farm version of slaughterhouses.

IF, however, horses were slaughtered humanely on the premises (for example, by my neighbor when his horse had aged and been ready for euthanasia), I would be proud to eat that kind of meat. It's what we should aspire to: the method, not the species. If you eat any meat at all, you too should be observing your own distaste for factory-style slaughterhouses by eschewing ALL meats that come from them.

It's also worth noting that at least horses only suffer for a brief period of time relative to the feedlotted cattle and compressed poultry and swine we tend to consume. Even more of a reason for you to stay away from meat that's not humanely raised and slaughtered. After all, horses have no more feeling or intelligence than a pig (for example). They are no more sensitive or stress-prone. They are all animals and they all deserve our respect, respect we are currently not offering them in any way through our current system of farming them. 

Put your money where your mouth is. That's what I say to anyone as appalled by US equine slaughter as I am. Don't ban horse meat (an ethnocentric and short-sighted kow-tow to our majority's cultural mores). Change the method by which all species are dispatched. 

Dr. Patty Khuly July 30th, 2009 06:48:59 PM

Grr, I'm gonna have to buy those 2 vacant lots next to my new house if you keep talking like that!

PS: Keep talking like that.  I'm a terrible procrastinator who needs pushed.

PJBoosinger July 30th, 2009 07:04:18 PM

I live in NZ, and sometimes buy raw horsemeat for my pets. I haven't seen it for sale in the butcher shops, for people food, though. I would like to know if their slaughter is humane or not, but it's virutally impossible to find this information. The more involvement we have with our meat before it becomes meat, the better for us all.  While I make a good effort to eat mainly free-range and wild meat, I can't afford to do this for my two large dogs and two cats. I buy the horse because the pets love to eat it and I like to think that the horse wasn't raised exclusively for eating. It probably had a good life before slaughter. Like someone commented about the pigs and chickens- woe to them on the factory farm. Thus I chose the meat of the animal that allowed the animal to have a good life before death. Anyway, I'm glad I have the option to buy horse meat.

Margaret July 30th, 2009 10:23:31 PM

Margaret, I'm in NZ too, and while I have not seen horse slaughter here, I think it may be no more or less humane than beef or sheep slaughter. (We get taught about it in vet school.) A lot of pleasure horses here get sent "to the hunt." This means that when it comes time for the horse to die, the owner calls a hunt club and the horse gets trailered to a nearby hunt club, where it is shot or captive-bolted by someone experienced in horse slaughter. Once shot, the horse immediately loses consciousness and sensation. As I understand it, this is done one horse at a time as they occasionally come in, so there is no mass of panicked or despairing horses around. The meat is then used to feed the hunting dogs.

At horse auctions (or at least at the largest horse auction site in NZ), if horses aren't sold, the owner may be approached by the "meat man" who offers a minimal sum. Meat horses are then loaded on a float by auction sales workers who handle them the same way they handle all the other horses. The horse loaders are experienced and generally compassionate. What happens once they get to their destination, I don't know.

In NZ, at least, there are drug withholding times for horses, so the meat should not have any drug residues. Veterinarians are legally obliged to inform horse owners that they cannot send their horses to slaughter for X number of days after a given drug has been administered. Needless to say, this is an awkward conversation with most horse owners!

cayugaduck July 30th, 2009 11:28:39 PM

I do remember a time back in the 70's when horse meat came into fashion. It was offered for sale in many meat markets and stores. There were articles in the paper about people who tried it and raved about it. But it really didn't sell well and eventually just disappeared from the market. Americans at that time just didn't eat horse. Now, of course, our culture has changed with new ethnic groups arriving who don't have the same reservations about eating horses as we do. So perhaps there would be a market for it should it appear again. I'd rather see it offered in stores than to see peoples' horses butchered in the middle of the night in their pastures.

However, we do put a lot of things into our horses---such as wormers---that are not to be put into animals bred for consumption. So that needs to be a consideration should horse meat ever be marketed again.

Personally, I would no more eat a horse than I would eat my cats or my dogs...or my husband for that matter. These beings are on a different plane for me than the rest. I know that isn't fair...that all animals have thoughts and feelings and deserve a lot better from us. But some animals are just more connected to us than others. (Pig owners tell us that their pigs are so smart and clever, and I know that they are---but they just don't bring out the same feelings in me as the animals I keep as companions).  A cow you are raising in your yard for meat can never qualify as a pet even if you name it and no matter how wonderful its care is...it is still meat and whoever is raising it keeps that in mind at all times. That special level of affection and love can never be there or the cow will end up dying of old age!

At this time I am buying my beef from a local butcher. The cows are locally raised and pasture slaughtered and butchered. I will soon be buying my pork the same way. Next year I will have egg-laying chickens and am seeking a local source for meat chickens. I don't think I would be very good at doing the slaughter thing.

PJ...just because horses were domesticated by us and kept in fences does not equal trust. Have you ever actually trained a horse and found that amazing connection that happens when it finally accepts you as its leader? When they finally give themselves over, willing to march into the gates of hell if you tell them it is ok? That is what I am talking about. It is a wonderful feeling and I always feel honored that they are willing to do this. It is something that is freely given once it has been earned...it can't be forced.

Horses in the feedlots are often gorgeous, healthy animals who just had some really bad luck. There are young horses with papers, pregnant mares, horses with new shoes and perfect grooming...I often think that their owners have no idea where their horses have ended up. The feedlot where I got my horses has a sign that says "Horses Bought and Sold". It says nothing about being a holding pen for slaughterbound horses. People bring their horses there to sell them and probably assume that the feedlot owner will find them a wonderful new home. Plus I think that many people are ignorant of what goes on at auctions. Maybe they just don't want to know.

khatti July 31st, 2009 02:28:42 AM

I must add my two cents here...

I whole-heartedly agree.

As a life-long lover of equines, I think slaughter sounds terrible and the state in which many are kept between auction and slaughter is heartwrenching.

Since the ban of horse slaughter in America, there has been a HUGE rise in malnutrition and economic euthanasia. Worst of all, people are dumping horses randomly in the middle of the night - No longer able to support them, owners turn them loose wherever they can which results in malnutrition and severe dehydration of these horses.... The cases of horse dumping are increasing in horrific numbers because sanctuaries are full and no one is buying in the horse market at the moment, especially without the meat market.

Mexico slaughters horses in a very inhumane way, but Canada performs the slaughters just as they would with cattle.

In my mind, I would rather a horse endure a relatively quick death, then dying from malnutrition, as the amount of suffering would be incredibly different.

(I do not agree with completely sound and younger horses being sold for slaughter, however... it makes no sense to have a horse that is perfectly fine as a mount to not have a potential job as a successful riding horse. Horses that are at the end of their line, however, benefit from the quick process instead of enduring pain and starvation as more and more horses are encountering since the ban of horse slaughter in America)

Kimberly July 31st, 2009 02:58:11 AM

I guess we all have an "agenda" My I am proud to say is to end(or at least reduce) animal suffering in the hands of humans. Horse racing, dog racing, circuses zoos factory farms.You get my drift.

Robert Garnett July 31st, 2009 10:01:04 AM

khatti, I've never owned horses but I've known a handful that didn't require fencing.  Nonetheless, I believe this is a decision best made by the owner of the horse.  Just about all owners of animals could do with learning more.  None of us is born knowing it all and many do not want to know.  Knowledge is power but it also carries great responsibility.

PJBoosinger July 31st, 2009 10:03:46 AM

Boosinger,

Your attack on my supposed lack of 'open-mindedness' was unappreciated.  It verged on namecalling. 

That aside, I am well versed in animal slaughter techniques and agricultural regulations int he US and Europe.  In fact, I spent a summer in France interning with INRA, their version of the USDA, and toured three slaughterhouses (including large animal facilities) during operating hours, have been to their agricultural production facilities, and (as of 2001) I knew the basics of what was legally required of animal producers.  The standards were far higher than in the US.  The cost of food was higher, however, our agricultural commodity prices are artificially low. So, please, stop making assumptions because it's making us both look like asses.

The distance these animals travel to slaughter here, as well as the methods of transport, etc, pose a health risk to the animals and to the humans that eventually consume them. 

Have I eaten horse?  No, but I have sat at the table with others who have without a shudder.  They are exercising their choice.

I do not believe you can legally kill and eat your dog, your cat, and I believe the same holds true for horses.  In fact, the only equine meat I know of being consumed in the US was a very cured sausage made of donkey that some French students snuck in  during the summer of 2000. 

According to your line of thinking about 'waste not' we should be using captive bolt or electric shock on all shelter animals so that they can be used in feed.  I highly doubt that will ever be approved as a humane method of euthanasia.

My main concern is with the overbreeding and overpopulation of horses.  THAT is what breeds neglect cases.  If the horse population were more in line with the needs of American horseowners then horse prices would again rise (as all the breed associations are hoping the slaughter will do) and each horse would become a more valuable commodity- and easier to rehome.  The problem with the slaughter solution is that it doesn't provide a long-term fix.  As long as overbreeding and breeding sub-par animals remains economically feasible due to easy ways to offload the extras, those backyard breeders will continue to produce.  If we remove the ability to profit from those animals, we encourage more responsible breeding practices.  Additionally, if each horse started and ridden hard too young which breaks down weren't able to be profited from, the horse industry would be more likely to more in a more humane direction.  I envision a possibility of AQHA's broken at 3 or 4, racehorses maiden runs at age 3, etc.  This would extend the usable life of so many horses. 

I am also a horse owner.  I own three- one comes from an auction where he was not in the kill pen but I outbid the local feedlot owner for him (my under $300 wonder-arab, great horse and very sound- well trained), one came from a now-defunct rescue in WA.  I put my money where my mouth is.  Now, to put your money where your mouth is would be gruesome.  I imagine the next time an animal of yours needs euthanasia that you take it outside, shoot it in the head, and have it for dinner.  I'll pass on that.

Now my chickens on the other hand....

yum.  However, they were raised here, transported humanely, and the process was quick.  I can transport more than one roo together without them kicking each other to death, the hens don't trample each other, no broken legs....

It's a little bit different.

Besides, if we are worried about wasted meat we should be mroe concerned about the massive overpopulation of deer in many parts of the nation.  They cause many auto accidents, raise on insurance rates, and many starve to death each winter.  There is a good horse of lean, non-medicated, protein.  No worry about residuals from medicines.

Jen

Jen July 31st, 2009 02:35:52 PM

It's not about death.

SLAUGHTER IS NOT A HUMANE WAY TO KILL A HORSE.

Not even close. I would rather my horse be a victim of the Miami criminal than take the ride in the truck to the slaughterhouse, within our borders or otherwise, and be killed the way they are there.

I think it's despicable that you or any vet would support slaughter the way in which it is conducted in Mexico, Canada, or the way it was in this country.

Again, I am not against death. I am against an extended gruesome, wretched, suffering death. That is slaughter, currently.

I can only hope the reason you support it is that you do not truly know how horrible it is.

In your influential position, maybe you should check it out first hand before taking a stance.

My whole opinion of you has changed, Dr. Khuly, and I am sorely disappointed. This has truly ruined my day.

From your own page - "The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated." - Mohandas Gandhi

How can you be so hypocritical?

Erin August 4th, 2009 12:16:51 PM

The slaughter of horses is completely unacceptable. We would not send our dogs and cats or children's pet rabbits to slaughter were we unable to keep them, so why send our horses. There are so many better options such as rescue farms and even some humane societies will take the unwanted equines, not to mention the millions of horse lovers who are dead set against the legalization of the slaughter of their beloved friends. I would rather suffer the pain of traveling to a slaughterhouse before letting ANY ONE OF THE TWISTED PEOPLE WHO THINK THE KILLING OF AN INNOCENT ANIMAL IS OK ANYWHERE NEAR MY HORSE. if it is the last thing I do, I will ensure that no animal from the United States will under go the suffering of slaughter. If you fear the welfare of large zoo animals

#1. They can  it cows, it is barley different and though I am against the slaughter of any animal, I do realize some is inevitable. 

#2. If you feel it is to expensive well why don't you just put them back where they belong- nothing wants to just be stared at it's             entire life. Plus the animal would be much happier living a free life out of the binds of captivity.

For those who agree with me or have something further to say on this subject I have a website under construction which I invite you to visit once it is up at:

                www.fairlyequine.weebly.com

Bri September 27th, 2009 03:40:48 PM

http://www.uggcase.com/UGG-Halendi-Sandal/

http://www.tiffanyjewelrybuy.com/tiffany-cuff-c-14.html

UGG Halendi Sandal discount November 8th, 2009 01:33:34 PM

discount watches ,discount mens watches ,Discount Womens Watches ,cheap watches ,wholesale watch faces ,watch face ,Jewelry Watches ,jewelry watch ,bracelet watch bracelet watches,bracelet watches

discount watches November 9th, 2009 07:33:10 AM

Discount Timberland boots Store-Timberland boots,Timberland shoes,ed hardy,cheap replica handbags,replica lv handbags,Louis Vuitton Handbags on sale.

ed hardy November 9th, 2009 07:36:55 AM

ring watch  ring watches fashion watches wholesale fashion watches discount fashion watches women's fashion watches

women's fashion watches November 9th, 2009 07:54:00 AM

Breitling watches

Breitling watches November 9th, 2009 02:21:08 PM

<a href="Panerai'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Panerai/">Panerai replica</a><a href="Patek'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Patek-Philippe/">Patek Philippe replica</a><a href="Piaget'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Piaget/">Piaget replica</a><a href="Rado'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Rado/">Rado replica</a><a href="Tag'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Tag-Heuer/">Tag Heuer replica</a><a href="Tudor">http://www.iwcwatches.us/Tudor/>Tudor replica</a><a href="U-boat'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/U-boat/">U-boat replica</a><a href="Vacheron'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Vacheron-Constantin/">Vacheron Constantin replica</a>

sddasf November 11th, 2009 08:33:12 AM

[url="http://www.cartierwatches.us/Hublot/"]Hublotreplica[/url]

<url="Rolex'>http://www.iwcwatches.us/Rolex/Air%20King/">Rolex Air-King replica</url>

Rolex Air-King (watches) replica November 11th, 2009 02:09:26 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 12th, 2009 09:57:28 PM

Maurice Lacroix watches

Maurice Lacroix watches November 13th, 2009 09:55:14 AM

UGG Classic Cardy

Discount Uggs Boots On Sale

Ugg Classic Tall Boots

Ugg Boots Cheap

Ugg New Styles

ugg boots on lale November 13th, 2009 10:51:05 AM

replica watch

replica A.Lange &amp;Sohne

replica Audemars Piguet

replica Bell &amp; Ross

replica Breguet

replica Breitling

replica croum November 13th, 2009 11:21:52 PM

replica Louis Vuitton

replica Jaquet droz November 17th, 2009 08:14:19 AM

Montblanc watch for sale

movado watch for sale

omega watch for sale

oris watch for sale

Panerai watch for sale

Maurice Lacroix watch for sale November 18th, 2009 06:40:39 AM

Hermes replica

Hublot replica

IWC replica

Jaquet droz replica

Lady replica

Hermes replica November 18th, 2009 10:11:02 AM

For Christmas Day is coming,many people have done for the Christmas gifts are carefully selected for the preparation,I tell you ,selecting chrismas gifts unavoidable to choose cheap wholesale cloting,mac cosmetics,cheap gucci shoes,superp90xetc,welcome order here and enjoy yourself.

Goodluck November 19th, 2009 04:21:40 PM

How to convert Mod files ? With MOD File Converter for windowns and mac softeare , you can convert MOD to MP4 Mac easily.MOD File Converter for mac also support Convert MTS to MP4 Mac and MTS to MPEG Mac.

dfgerg November 19th, 2009 09:31:17 PM