|
Regardless of your stance on this issue, the
direction of equine related legislation in our country will
potentially - or rather eventually - affect every single
horse owner.
Facts: (refer
to MORE INFORMATION links below)
-
slaughtering horses in the US
is illegal; Congress banned using taxpayer funds to
inspect horse meat, which stopped horse slaughter in the
United States because US federal law requires the
inspection of all meat.
-
the
estimated US horse population was 9.2 million in 2005
(American Horse Council)
-
94,000+ horses were
slaughtered and processed in the US in 2005
(American Horse Council)
-
world-wide
human horse meat consumption was the equivalent of 4.7
million horses in 2005 (American
Horse Council)
-
the 3 US horse processing
plants contributed less than 2.5% of the world's horse
meat consumption
-
USDA inspectors and
veterinarians were employed full time to regulate every aspect of
horses' care, treatment and handling
while en route and
at processing plants (not the case in other countries)
-
the highly publicized story
of 1986 Kentucky Derby Winner, Ferdinand, being
slaughtered and eaten by Japanese often fails to mention
that Ferdinand was slaughtered in Japan, not
the US. US legislation does nothing to influence
world wide horse consumption.
-
the largest European
consumers of horse meat are Belgium, Italy and France
-
graphic
anti-slaughter propaganda film depicting inhumane horse
slaughter is filmed in Mexico, not the US.
-
AQHA supports horse
slaughter;
the National
Thoroughbred Racing Association
does not
Time Line:
(refer to MORE INFORMATION links below)
-
1998 -
California voters approved the nation's first and only
state law outlawing the killing of horses for human
consumption
-
2002 - Congress
upholds "livestock" status of equines (versus
'companion animal' status). In the context of taxes
and other issues, 'agricultural' status offers many
benefits.
-
2005 -
Congress banned using taxpayer funds to
inspect horse meat, which stopped horse slaughter in the
United States because US federal law requires the
inspection of all meat
-
2006 - the 2005
Congress Bill banning using tax payer money to inspect
horse meat is reversed
-
2006 - Horse
Protection Act (HR
503) passes, and is immediately tabled for
reconsideration on future calendar. Bill prohibits the "shipping, transporting,
moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing,
selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be
slaughtered for human consumption" and
gives the gov't the right to
detain, test, and gather evidence from "any
horse at any horse show, horse exhibition, or horse sale
or auction that is sore or which the Secretary has
probable cause to believe is sore"
-
2007 - Texas upholds
the 1949 state law banning the sale of horsemeat for
human consumption in Texas. Two Texas processing
plants cease operation.
-
2007 - The federal
district court orders the U.S. Department of Agriculture
to stop inspecting horses slaughtered at the last
operating slaughterhouse in the US. The
plant ceases operation.
-
Fall 2007 - no equine
processing plants are operational in the United States.
Horses are now transported to Canada and Mexico for
processing - facing longer hauls, harsher conditions,
and little or no humane regulation.
-
February 2008 -
proposed legislation S 311 awaits consideration in Congress
(the revisiting of the passed bill HR 503)
|
The Issue:
Until recently, there were 3
USDA regulated and inspected horse processing plants in
the US that handled
60,000 to 90,000 horses per year. In 2007, legislation
forced the closure of all 3 plants. Horses intended
for slaughter are now shipped for processing to Canada and
Mexico (further and under much harsher, non-regulated
conditions).
The issue of slaughtering horses
for human consumption and other productive uses is highly
controversial to many people for many reasons. But is the processing of
equines for productive use truly 'cruelty' or is it simply a
necessary evil in our society? Over 200 related
organizations, including the American Association of Equine
Practitioners (AAEP) and the Animal Welfare Council, support
slaughter as an outlet for unwanted horses in the US.
Cats and Dogs:
Consider another subject dear to
our heart in this country - cats and dogs. Despite all the
extensive adoption and
educational campaigns, as many as 5 million unwanted
dogs and cats are euthanized annually at a tremendous
financial burden to local governments. Since it is
physically impossible to find homes for every animal in
need, this is the only viable solution to keeping
these millions of pets from potentially suffering a worse
fate - neglected, abused or feral on the streets and hills
of our nation. (*see footnote
below)
Are horses different? If so, how? Most animal
rights activists condone 'humane euthanasia' for unwanted
horses, just not slaughter. The US Congress has concluded
that the means of humanely ending an equine's life per
federally regulated processing plant policy "prevents
needless suffering" (Humane Slaughter Act). So it
seems that the most heated controversy surrounds 1) the
transport
conditions and care of horses intended for slaughter and 2)
the usability of an equine's carcass once dead.
'Rights' or Wrong?
Many would argue the larger
controversy surrounding this issue is not that of animal
rights, but rather, the constitutional rights of all US citizens.
This country was founded on the premise that people did not
want to be micro-managed by their government (Boston Tea Party
ring a bell?). We put such emphasis on our social
freedoms - freedom to vote, speak, work, play and practice
the religion of our choice - yet legislation pertaining to this issue
is dictating the management of our personal property.
In this country, animals ARE
still considered personal property.
Bottom line here? If a person
no longer wishes to own an animal, do they have the right to
sell it to whomever they please? Does a person
have the right to participate in a world-wide industry, as
long as he complies with all governmental regulations pertaining to
that industry? Does the US government
have the right to determine what is or what is not a 'meat
animal'? These questions reach much further than whether
or not horse slaughter is 'tasteful' to the average
American.
No one has proposed
a law mandating the slaughter of unwanted horses.
Anyone can go to their local sale barn and rescue as
many horses as they want for one $5 bid above the killer
buyer. Anyone can give their horse to a rescue
group or euthanize their horse for any reason through a
veterinarian. But if the government
is allowed to tell you where or how to dispose of an unwanted horse,
what may be next? For instance, there is a
proposed congressional Bill 282 that would give Mississippi restaurant owners
the right to refuse to serve obese people (see
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2008/01/no-fat-people-allowed-only-slim-will-be.html
). Next may be
the right to refuse blonde people, or dark skinned people.
Extreme and unrealistic? Ask the guy who sent hate
mail and threatened to sue Whoazone on grounds of promoting
cruelty to animals (via reining). Ask the people who want
to ban rodeo, ban cows from grazing public lands, ban
milking dairy cows because their calves are taken at birth?
The list goes on and its a very slippery slope.
Information and opinions on the
pros and cons of this topic are nearly limitless, as are
organizations with which to register your support or to whom
to send your money. All we wanted to do here was
provide some basic facts, figures, and web resources, and
most importantly, advise horse owners of the actual
wording of pertinent horse-related legislation that HAS BEEN
PASSED and WILL
eventually affect the entire horse industry - slaughter and
otherwise. Regardless of your opinion on this issue,
there are some basic horse owner rights at stake, and we
thought every horse owner should know.
*FOOTNOTE: in Los Angeles, CA, a law has been passed
requiring the spay and neuter of all pets. An id
chipping rule is also part of this law.
Proponents say requiring the sterilization of all pets will
reduce the number of euthanized animals (estimated currently
at 15,000 in L.A. annually) and encourage responsible pet
ownership. They claim the law will help control the
problems of gangs breeding vicious dogs and 'puppy mills'
producing sub-standard animals.
Opponents to the law say that, historically, mandatory spay
and neuter regulations have actually increased the numbers
of unwanted/unclaimed pets. When stray animals fall
into the hands of animal control or local shelters, owners
are much less likely to claim them due to potential fines
for being in violation of the law. Opponents also
claim this law will have little influence on gang
involvement and 'puppy mills' - owner groups who are
unlikely to abide by the spay/neuter law, or any pet-related
regulatory measures.
QUESTIONS: Does any facet of government have the right to
require mandatory id chipping and sterilization of a
targeted group of animals? Should citizens maintain
the right to breed their animals if they so desire? Do
regulatory laws mainly impact law-abiding residents, or do
they influence less compliant citizens as well?
|
WHERE DOES EVERYONE ELSE
STAND ON THE ISSUE?
LEGISLATION:
-
NEW
as of 4-15-08!
Reports from Capitol
Hill indicate Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana is
attempting to add her legislation, Senate Bill 311, to
the Supplemental Spending Bill providing urgently needed
funding for our troops. At a time when the Senator
should be concerned about our troops in Iraq, the
economy and rebuilding New Orleans, she is clearly more
concerned with forwarding her own private initiatives.
Landrieu’s legislation is extremely detrimental to the
horse industry and adding it as a rider to funding for
our troops is an abuse of the legislative process.
Congressman Jerry Lewis R-Calif, the Ranking Member on
the House Appropriations Committee has warned, “We must
have a clean supplemental, free of contentious riders
and veto triggers which would delay much-needed funding
for our troops.”
S311 is legislation that
“amends the Horse Protection Act to prohibit the
shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving,
possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses
and other equines to be slaughtered for human
consumption and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture
to detain for examination, testing, or the taking of
evidence: (1) any horse at any horse show, horse
exhibition, or horse sale or auction that is sore or
which the Secretary has probable cause to believe is
sore; and (2) any horse or other equine that the
Secretary has probable cause to believe is being
shipped, transported, moved, delivered, received,
possessed, purchased, sold, or donated in violation of
such prohibition. It increases appropriations to carry
out such Act.”
Please call Senator Mary
Landrieu’s office and tell her to focus on providing the
necessary funding for our troops, not on harming the
horse industry. Mary Landrieu can be reached at her
Washington, DC Office at (202) 224-5824 or via her
webform for email at
http://landrieu.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
Landrieu’s State Offices;
New Orleans (504) 589-2427
Baton Rouge (225) 389-0395
Shreveport (318) 676-3085
Lake Charles (337) 436-6650
-
proposed: S. 311 -
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=main&bill=s110-311
-
passed Sept 2006: HR 503
-
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-503
HORSE MEAT CONSUMPTION AROUND
THE WORLD
MORE INFORMATION:
CONTACT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
REPRESENTATIVE: (directory)
OFFER COMMENTS ON OTHER SITES/PETITIONS:
HORSE RESCUE GROUPS:
|
