Posts Tagged ‘news stories’
Halter Horses -Yummy?
And now for our third, and final, post on horse slaughter. We have a real treat for you today! These two guest bloggers have widely different approaches – one is very pro-slaughter, while the other one is very against, and yet they both start off with the same thought: Why are horses treated differently than other animals? They are livestock after all…
———-
I fully support horse slaughter.
Horses are livestock. They are marvelous, wonderful animals, but they don’t shit rainbows and they don’t fart butterflies. They are animals.
The first thing I’m going to address is the ridiculous notion that it’s “okay” to slaughter other livestock, ie. cattle, chickens, pigs, goats, but for some reason, it’s NOT OKAY to slaughter horses.
Anyone care to explain this to me?
I’m sorry, but anyone who eats meat but is against horse slaughter is a hypocrite. Slaughter is slaughter, no matter WHAT animal is being killed. You can’t raise one form of life above others. They are all living creatures. If you’re okay eating your cheeseburger or fried chicken, then by all rights you should be okay with horse slaughter.
I’m not saying anyone should be forced to eat horse, of course. I don’t eat fish. Does that mean I’m against commercial fishing or fish raising? Hell no. Eat that fish up! I just don’t like the taste of fish. But I’ll tell you one thing. I do like the taste of horse.
Whoops, was that a Facebook “defriend” I just heard going off?
Then we get the people who stare at your with their jaws hanging like dopes, then manage to stutter out something ridiculous. For example, I had one jackanape tell me that *I* was a hypocrite if I wouldn’t eat *my* horses.
Bullshit.
I keep goats. I love my goats. I am the Goat Whisperer. I prefer not to eat my pet goats. I didn’t eat my pet chickens. I wouldn’t eat my pet horses.
But I sure as heck raised some meat goats, meat chickens for myself, butchered, and ate them. They were delicious. And if I had the room and set up? Sure I’d raise up a foal to eat. Yup, you heard that right.
Meat = meat.
[Quick note: these were originally 2 posts but we've condensed them down to one to reduce the length]
If there’s one thing in the horse world that puzzles me like no other, it’s halter horses.
Huge, overfed, overmuscled horses on tiny little feet, paraded around an arena and judged.
Do you know what halter horses actually are, but no one wants to ADMIT?
Meat.
I look at these halter horses, and I’m talking about halter horses that are good for nothing but showing off with their tiny hooves and posty legs. (There are good balanced halter horses out there who go on to have successful careers being ridden.) You know what I see? I see an animal bred for fast growth, heavy muscling, stocky body. To grow up and EAT.
Good for nothing else except a dinner plate. And yet, hypocrisy of all hypocrisy, the people breeding these freakish looking horses would clutch their chests in horror at the very thought. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that’s where a good many of them end up anyways. Don’t win enough ribbons at the end of a lead rope? Where else is it going to go? You can’t ride them. Very few people have the room or money for a fat pasture puff.
Off to auction they go, and then on a truck to Mexico.
Look halter horse people. Stop screwing around and admit what these horses are for. Open the slaughter houses back up in the United States and start eating horse meat. Then you’ll really see your market boom!
Got a nice stallion that puts out fast growing fat little babies? Just think of all the money you could make in stud fees!
Halter horses. Delicious.
Thanks to Kristina for submitting the above guest post, you can check out her blog at http://www.knsfarm.blogspot.com/
———-
Versus another guest post, very anti-slaughter (and pro-vegan!)
———-
What I’ve written might anger you but read my post in its entirety because this comes from a place of truth and compassion for all sentient beings. First of all, since you’re on this site I’m sure you consider yourself an animal lover, maybe even an animal activist. But you’re probably not and instead you’re probably a hypocrite. And what makes you a hypocrite is while you treat your horses and household pets humanely you support an industry which crams animals into cages for their entire lives and pays factory workers to slaughter and abuse what our society deems as food. And what makes this such an atrocity is that our diet has no need for animal protein but instead we are healthier by not eating animals and this is a proven fact. This includes meat, dairy and eggs. Now if you’re a reader and your vegan, then I applaud you! But if you’re not and you consider yourself a lover of animals then you really need to dig deep and think about the choices you make. If you know the truth that our diet doesn’t require any animal products and you continue to eat animals from here on out then you’re doing it for selfish reasons, which is what we’re all here fighting against in the first place.
You might be thinking that horses, dogs and cats are different then cattle, chicken, fish, etc. But are they? All sentient beings have hearts that pump blood and oxygen like ours; they all eat, breathe, defecate and procreate. What makes you think that while all of their organs function as ours do, that their brain doesn’t? They all feel pain as we do, they value their lives and freedom like we do, they express love for their offspring like we do. What makes us so different and what gives us the right to oppress them? No animal should suffer and die for my food because I have no necessity to eat them. Today slavery of humans is looked at as horrible but do you think that back then many of the slave owners looked at those slaves as equals? Do you think that today we have the same problem with animals? The truth is that while we protect our horses and household pets we are speciesists. We discriminate between species and treat some like kings while we torture and kill others. Unless we wake up and realize this we are still contributing to the problem. Our society should protect the weakest and most vulnerable but while we call ourselves animal lovers we are not. This isn’t just about eating animals and abusing animals; it is how we see the animals. Are they property? Because if they are property then as their owner we have the right to treat them as we wish and people will always abuse them. But I know that all of you feel differently, so if they aren’t property what are they? And if we want people to treat horses, dogs and cats as property then what right do we have to treat other animals as property Until “animal lovers” start to see animals as individuals we can’t get anywhere. Animals are not our property and that is the bottom line.
So what does this have to do with the Fugly blog? This way of looking at all animals expands into what we make our horses do and how we treat them. At the root of looking for fair treatment of horses is the foundation of compassion for all living beings and unless we address this problem at our core we won’t make change. I also think that as long as we as humans live selfishly without regard for the consequences of our actions then there will always be abuse. We can’t fight for the well-being of the animals we love unless we fight for the well-being of all. This means compassion from everything from our own horses, to livestock to children that aren’t ours.
Do you really think we could find an end to horse slaughter if we ourselves still support the slaughter of other animals? Because if we show compassion only toward certain species how can we hold others accountable for not showing compassion towards the species we prefer?
The Slaughter Debate rages on
And now for the counter point article in the guest blogger mini-series on slaughter.
————
Arabian Professional and Amateur Horsemen’s Association Issues Illogical Pro-Slaughter Missive
Those of you who know me from other sites or in real life (and I assume that’s anyone reading this blog, since I don’t promote it outside my other online profiles) know that I own a Thoroughbred gelding and an Arabian mare, both rescued from slaughter, and that they’re one reason I call myself a cowgirl.
I define “cowboy” or “cowgirl” pretty narrowly: A person who lives a lifestyle that includes owning and/or enjoying horses; appreciating wide open spaces; supporting an independent, traditionally “western” lifestyle; and believing in the humane treatment of animals, including those used for food, work, and other purposes. I proudly wear my “cowgirl” label because, to many of those who share my passions and beliefs, it conveys a great deal. It’s also my way of showing respect to the men and women in the equestrian community who have mentored and influenced me throughout my lifetime.
I’ve met some wonderful people who support equine slaughter. I’ve heard some rational arguments in favor, from people I gladly count as fellow cowgirls or as cowboys.
The Arabian Professional and Amateur Horsemen’s Association does not, apparently, employ any real cowgirls/boys in its policy or PR departments. Instead of iterating any reasonable arguments in favor of slaughter, they recently put out an email release giving some of the worst reasons for equine slaughter I’ve heard. The quoted portions are from their email, as posted here. The other bits are my comments.
Dear Friends,
The Arabian Professional and Amateur Horsemen’s Association voted, with unanimous approval, to thank the AHA Board for continuing your support for the re-opening of the equine terminal marketplace, and to join with the AHA in support of the reinstatement of equine processing in the United States.
Weasel words like “equine terminal marketplace” reek of doublespeak.
While we appreciate that this subject can be a sensitive one to those who are not intimately involved in the horse industry,
I’m the owner of an AHA registered Arabian horse, who is the third such animal I’ve owned. I’ve been riding since my eighth birthday. I spent eight years volunteering at least twice a week for a horse rescue, including a little more than two years on its Board of Directors. I worked for five years for various equestrian businesses, and my dollars support a boarding stable, trainers, registries, farriers, and equestrian supply companies. I’d say I’m intimately involved, and yet, equine slaughter is a touchy subject for me.
there is no question that it is an integral component for the continuation of the horse’s survival into the 21st century, as well as to any and all breed associations.
If one asserts that there is “no question” that something is true, the statement being so staunchly supported should be connected to a source. I have personally found that my horses, who live in the 21st century, are most apt to survive when they are not killed and eaten.
The simple fact of the matter is that for the horse to continue to survive and contribute to mankind, as it has done for the last 5000 years, the equine terminal marketplace must be reestablished in the United States. Equine slaughter for rendering and consumption is a necessity in the equine livestock industry, in order to allow horses at the bottom of the pyramid a humane, dignified, and contributing end. The bold words are the important points of this referendum, not the emotionally exploited ones of slaughter, rendering, or human consumption. Without a terminal marketplace, horses today are left trying to survive, for the first time ever, after their usefulness as a work-mate to man has passed. Regardless of whether you like the idea of equine slaughter, the vast, documented increase in equine suffering throughout the US since the close of the slaughter houses should be enough in and of itself for all people who truly care about horses to stand up and demand that those of us who have invested our lives in horses be the ones responsible for making the decisions about the marketplace that surrounds them.
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. A short list of unsourced claims from APAHA in this paragraph:
- Slaughter is “necessary” for equine survival. What studies suggest that Equus ferus callus will become extinct if it is not slaughtered for human consumption?
- Horses sent to slaughter are at the “bottom of the pyramid.” What pyramid? By whose definition?
- Slaughter is “humane” and “dignified.” Concerns about the lack of a humane slaughter process for equines are central to arguments against equine slaughter, and cannot be pithily dismissed simply because an industry association declares slaughter “humane.”
- Horses have never survived past their usefulness to man in the past. Please provide me with citations that invalidate the eight years I spent caring for rescued horses who, by and large, were not especially useful to mankind.
- “Vast, documented increase in equine suffering” — again, source? Studies? Numbers? Definition of the subjective “suffering?”
Some people were affronted when the AHA stepped up last year to support the reopening of the equine processing plants. We contend that as breeders and current caretakers of the world’s oldest breed of horse, we have an obligation to our Arabian horses to support the reopening as well. It affects breeders and the breed in a singularly unassailable way; simply, that the free and low price market for the “pet quality” horses, if you will, is simply no longer available. The bottom tier of every breed and breeder’s marketplace, that for family riding horses, has been eaten up by the “rehoming” of over 300,000 horses since 2007, many of whom have huge medical issues, training issues, psychological issues, and on and on. Often, the people who take on these horses are novice horse lovers whose heart-strings have been played by emotional, fact-less advertising paid for by lobbying groups that never invest in shelters and rehoming at all. Once saddled with an adopted horse that by contract cannot be sold or bred, these horse lovers find the difficulty of dealing with the myriad of issues draining financially and mentally. Needless to say, these experiences are not good at building repeat, long-term business for the horse industry.
I’ve made my point about this email’s use of the logical fallacy “appeal to authority” as a substitute for scholarly citations, so I won’t go through this paragraph and point out the same. However, it’s important to note the registry’s condescending tone toward “novice” horse lovers whose “heart-strings” motivate them to care for horses. If you were a first-time horse owner reading this paragraph, would you describe the Arabian Professional and Amateur Horsemen’s Association as welcoming to novices?
We spoke recently with four different breed associations in order to research registrations since the ban, and discovered that every one is down by over one third in new registrations from 2006 to 2010. Quarter Horse registrations dropped from 150,000 in 2006 to less than 90,000 last year. Paints fell from 39,357 in 2006 to 17,835 in 2010. The Morgan Horse Association registered 3461 horses in 2006, with only 1835 in 2010. We are all aware of our own registration decline, from 10,311 in 2006 to 6660 in 2010. All these breeds weathered a similar economic downturn in the ‘80′s without this kind of drop in registrations, and rebounded accordingly, the difference being that when economically strapped owners could no longer afford feed for their horses, they had a way to reduce numbers until the economy changed, after which their breeding business could rebound.
Here’s the only fully transparent part of this message. Forget “humane” and “dignified.” The problem with a reduction in slaughter, for the AHA and other registries, is that it leads to a drop in registrations. Registries make their money from registrations and from show fees paid only by the owners of registered horses competing in registry-sanctioned events. If the slaughter pipeline contracts, people breed (and register) fewer horses, lacking an easy disposal method for unwanted horses.
But let’s think about that for a moment: APAHA itself points out that an economic downturn in the 1980s did not lead to the same drop in registration. However, they consider only one variable–ease of slaughtering unwanted horses–in comparing the two downturns. After 30 years, a few other things have changed:
- Animal adoption is a much more popular option for pet parents; this has trickled down to the horse world in that many people now seek to give an unwanted animal a home rather than purchasing a registered animal from a breeder.
- It is more expensive to keep a horse. Fewer people can or choose to make that expenditure.
- The AHA has spent 30 years promoting halter competitions that produce pretty horses who are, by and large, of no use for pleasure and performance riding.
- The AHA has developed a reputation for condoning the abuse of horses, particularly in the halter ring.
- The Arabian horse has developed a serious PR problem.
- The APAHA is too busy looking down its nose at soft-hearted first time owners to welcome them into the equestrian world, acknowledge their needs, and envelop them in a warm, supportive Arabian horse community that would inspire them to purchase, register, and exhibit Arabian horses.
By reopening the equine processing plants, we are simply restoring to horse owners and breeders the option that all other livestock breeders and owners have, and that horse owners and breeders had until the last four years. We will still retain the option to care for our horses after their usefulness is done, and we will still retain the option to rescue horses from the terminal marketplace. And people will still have the option to make horse meat available to some of the 25,000 people on earth per day who are dying of starvation, allowing horses a chance to give back and be useful to humans, as they have done for centuries, even after they have passed.
Let’s be real here: Nobody is proposing feeding starving children with horsemeat. If they were, it would be dismaying, since horsemeat from American companion and performance horses is loaded with drugs like “bute” that are labeled “not for use in animals intended for human consumption.” But they’re not. There is no nonprofit organization volunteering to construct and operate an equine slaughterhouse that would exist exclusively to donate horsemeat to the hungry. If our goal is to feed the starving, the grain our horses eat would be a more efficient donation.
Secondly, did anyone bother to ask the horses if they want to “give back” by being killed and eaten? No, we don’t ask that question of cattle or poultry, but nobody is using the desire of steer or hens to “be useful to humans” as an argument in favor of eating them. Mostly, we just argue that they’re pretty delicious.
There are issues to address, certainly, and many different options available to improve the terminal marketplace, among them mobile slaughter units and live web monitoring of plants. As horsemen, breeders, and horse lovers, we are the ones responsible for dealing with these issues, making sure that the terminal marketplace becomes ever more humane, with a quick and dignified passing, without undue stress, and where the horse can go on to be useful to man after his demise, just as he has been for the last 5000 years. This is not a job for politicians, lobbyists and animal rights people to define; it’s a job for us, so that the horse that has brought so much to our lives will survive and evolve to bring much needed help to the people coming after us.
In closing, APAHA would again like to commend the board of AHA for joining horse-industry leaders in the fight to protect the future of the Arabian horse breed and the horse in general.Sincerely,
The Arabian Professional and Amateur Horsemen’s Association Board of Directors
Oh, there are issues to address, all right, APAHABoD. There are definitely issues.
Let’s start with why you think that my registered Arabian mare would be more useful to an organization promoting the Arabian horse had she been killed and eaten–as she would have been before I had a chance to save her, had her death not been delayed by the necessity of exporting her to Mexico for “processing”– than as a living ambassador for the breed who will, after recovering from her ordeal, have a career either as a performance horse, therapy animal, pet, or breeding animal.
Let’s start with why you think my “heart-strings” make me a novice, because I choose to rescue horses in need rather than buy horses produced by the equine equivalent of puppy mills, the breeders with hundreds of horses who keep you in registration fees while causing immense suffering by flooding a contracted market with a supply for which there is currently little demand.
Perhaps, before you complain about your financial decline and blame it on too few horses being killed and eaten, you should consider how communications like this affect experienced amateur owners as they choose where to show, which horses to purchase, and which organizations to support.
Give the doublespeak a rest and try looking inward for solutions to your decline. If you don’t, your best case scenario is one in which more Arabian horses are slaughtered as registrations continue to drop year after year after year.
PS. I’ll share pictures of my horses in another post sometime soon. Didn’t put them here because they’re cute and fuzzy and obviously nobody wants to kill cute, fuzzy horses. That’s not what this is about. This is about an organization that is supposed to represent Arabian horse owners wasting their time and money spewing logical fallacies and condescension at their own clientele.
PPS. To reiterate: I love my rescued horses, but if you are a horse person who is pro-slaughter, I do not dislike you or consider that opinion invalid. I do, however, hope that you are able to do a better job than the APAHA of making a fact-based argument to support that opinion. Since, you know, most avocados could do a better job of that than the APAHA.
The Slaughter Debate
Going through the many, many submissions for the FHOTD writer’s job, a theme very quickly became apparent. Horse slaughter and the recent change in US law are very popular topics (forgive us, but; duh). It’s funny, because before we even started going through all the emails, we were making big plans for our first post. We wanted to address something topical and a little controversial, something that would really fire up a good debate. We wanted a topic that we felt strongly about. You guessed it – we were going to write about horse slaughter!
Since reading all the submissions, instead we’re going to throw this one out to the other writers who were hoping to contribute to Fugly. There were a lot of well written articles submitted. From those we’ve chosen two that we feel took an original approach to the topic.
———–
This first piece is by The Naughty Tobiano.
The Black Market Horse Meat Industry—Could Domestic Slaughter STOP this Atrocity?
While the debate of should horses be slaughtered has been a very hot, hot topic since the late 1990s; and it’s heating up even more with Obama’s signing of a bill that would repeal the ban on USDA inspectors essentially making it legal to slaughter horses again the U.S. except for in CA and IL. Both sides are vehemently arguing their points.
The anti-slaughter side argues that slaughtering a horse is inhumane and cruel as horses have souls and feelings; and that they should be considered pets or companion animals—not livestock. They point fingers at the breeding industry, back yard breeders, incentive programs offered by registries, and the money hungry horse dealers who only see $$$$$. They demand more laws, in some cases suggesting restrictions on who gets to own a horse is the answer. Others state a “foal tax” is the answer.
However, many of the horses standing in kill pens waiting to die are in the prime of their life: 8-15 yr olds, born BEFORE the ban on USDA inspectors went into effect. It is this point as well as some of the suffering slaughter bound horses face that have many pro-slaughter advocates suggesting Obama’s signature was a good thing. They argue the horses are suffering in Canadian and Mexican slaughter houses where the method of slaughter is NOT regulated. Evidence suggests horses’ throats are slit and the butchering begins before they are dead. The pro-slaughter side argues they want to lessen the suffering of horses that are presently bound for slaughter by tightly controlling the manner in which horses are treated at the new “equine processing plants” and ensure the slaughter is humane. They further cite how re-opening slaughter will reduce the unwanted horse population and restore the once lucrative economic market that the horse industry brought to all parts of the U.S.
Some people worry about the BLM mustangs. Some people worry about the race horses.
There is another argument that has little to do with the welfare of horses but instead focuses on the human consumption element of horse slaughter.
One anti-slaughter argument points to repeated European bans on U.S. horse meat (http://www.pennsylvaniaequestrian.com/news/EU-ban-1009.php ; http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/Quality-Safety/Tainted-US-horse-meat-puts-world-consumers-at-risk-welfare-body ) and state that it is ethically wrong for the U.S. to slaughter horses and export the meat when many American horses have been treated with medicines that clearly state on the label “not intended for use in horses for human consumption”. On the flip side, reports are showing there is little evidence that bute , ivemectrin, pyrantel, and other equine drugs stay in the horse’s system long enough to cause harm to humans. The paleo diet movement actually encourages horse meat, stating that humans were meant to eat horse: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/horse-meat/
But there is a much, much darker side to the unavailability of domestically processed and inspected meat: the black market for horse meat.
The following links are actual news stories concerning a growing problem in Southern Florida. Horses are being STOLEN and butchered on the side of the road, often while still alive, to supply meat for the black horsemeat market.
WARNING…….The videos are graphic and photos horrific.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61rD3rBC2L4&feature=related
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=6478115
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7VMcna1PAE
Though presently focused on a trend in Florida only, is black market horse meat reaching other ethnic communities around the U.S.? Though it appears the killers for this market are sticking to a small locality of Florida, what makes people think the horse meat is not traveling through the underground market to other states with heavy populations of Hispanic communities. Furthermore, is the desire for horsemeat reserved for the Hispanic culture or are other ethnic groups also feeding the greed of the black market.
Having said that, is it reasonable to believe that if the USDA began offering inspected, legal, domestic horse meat would the black market disappear?
This same argument has been made for the legalization of marijuana.
But….it was also made long before that in another still heated Pro Vs. Anti fight: Abortion. Prior to the legalization of abortion, thousands of women died while having an illegal abortion. But, once legalized, the back alley, black market diminished and women could safely make the choice concerning their own body.
Could this rationale not be applied to the black market for horse meat? Is it not reasonable to assume that IF people who wanted to eat horse meat due to their culture or their own personal health beliefs had access to a safe, legal source the black market would essentially disappear?
Obviously the current situation is grim as there are repeated reports of horses being stolen and simply disappearing. The anti-slaughter side points their fingers to the current “kill buyers” but I sincerely have my doubts that the dealers who sell to the feed lots are all running around Southern Florida snatching up family’s beloved horses? Why would they when there is a myriad of FREE ones on craigslist just a short trailer ride from many auction houses and feed lots.
So…..would the black market crumble if horse meat were domestically available? No matter how many videos of a captive bolt coming down on a horse I see, I cannot compare it to the terror and pain a horse like Geronimo suffered at the hands of the butchers who took him from his barn and tortured him just a half a mile from his family.
It may be a very distasteful thing to think about; but, under tightly regulated USDA supervised situations, could humane slaughter stop this atrocity?
———–
Check back tomorrow for another submission on this issue.
