Horse Slaughter
Patty Wilber
For the record, I recently rescued Winston out of a kill pen in Texas. Had I not, he would have gone to Mexico and been slaughtered, possibly for human consumption.
He is about 6 years old, and a charmer. I do not know, for sure, why he was in the kill pen, but my guess is the nasty, poorly healed hind leg wound with lots of proud flesh. Even with care, his leg will be permanently disfigured. Fortunately, he is not lame. (I actually was unaware of this problem when I rescued him…but that is another story).
So I bought, got him home, had a vet come, and finally, about 8 weeks later, am going to start riding him. I am happy to have him.
Despite all this, I am NOT opposed to horse slaughter, and was dismayed when the horse slaughter ban was enacted by Congress. This act specifically states that horses are not to be slaughtered for human consumption. Not sure there is a law to prevent slaughter for dog food, glue or other by products, but the fact remains that this law shut down the 3 horse slaughter facilities in this country. The effect was to drive the industry to Canada and Mexico, where there is obviously no U.S. oversight.
A new law in the works would ban the transport of equines for slaughter.
Why, being a horse lover, obsessed and possessed by the very essence of the horse, do I not oppose horse slaughter?
1. It is illogical. We kill man’s best friend, the dog, by the millions. We snuff out fluffy cats left and right. Hunting of all sorts of animals for food and for trophy is legal. We slaughter cows and ducks, sheep, goats and chickens and then eat them. What is so different about a horse? Romance aside, really, what is so different?
2. There are plenty of unusuable equines, as Winston nearly was. If a horse is unusuable, why should there be an obligation to feed, house and care for an him for upwards of 20 years.? It is expensive and time consuming. We don’t make owners of other animals do that. Horses are big hunks of meat. Slaughter and use of the carcass seems like a practical solution.
3. What happens to unwanted/ unusuable horses these days? Many rescue facilitities are full. Humane euthanasia is an option. Know how much that costs? Me neither, but I can tell you, it ain’t free. A vet has to come do the job and then someone has to come haul the carcass away. In the past, you could actually make a little bit on a horse that was unwanted. Now if you can’t afford to keep a horse and it won’t sell (economy and all), you mightnot be able to afford to euthanize it either. Guess you could shoot it and leave it for the coyotes (or maybe bury it $$$). I don’t really see how that is an improvement.
4. Unwanted and unusuable horses are being abandoned. Is starving more humane than slaughter? Not.
5. If I own the horse, I make the (humane, of course) decisions. I don’t need some urban bleeding heart bunny hugger aiding me. Do many of these folks really have a CLUE how much time, money, space, and FLIES go along with said horse. Um no. Please, if one has no idea about the reality of owning a horse, except a pastel-colored fantasy novel cover image (yeah ok those were actually unicorns on Doranna’s book cover, but CLOSE ENOUGH), then butt out.
6. I mentioned this above, but I will say it again. Closing the U.S. plants pushed the slaughter to Mexico and Canada. Did this help prevent horse slaughter? No. Did this increase the welfare of the horse? Apparently not. The conditions in the Mexican plants is worse than what we had here. I say reopen the U.S. plants and regulate them. If we can slaughter every other kind of animal, surely we can manage to do away with horses in a safe and humane way.
I bought Winston, and I don’t regret it. I don’t plan to throw 1800.00 (well that figure is low now–had his feet trimmed, got his shots, wormed him, been feeding him and am about to put my training time into him) at the bottomless pit of horse rescue again. In today’s horse market there are thousands of wonderful, inexpensive horses that are fully healthy and well cared for. It may sound more noble to rescue horse from the kill pen, but really it is all the same in the end. Time, money and the most fun a person can have.
Tags: horses, Opinionated, The Write Horse
September 3rd, 2010 at 09:24
I agree. There has to be a ‘middle of the road’ solution to anything. Ask any animal control officer how many underfed, abandoned animals they have seen since the shutdown of these plants. I do not advocate wanton for-profit horse slaughter, however, there has to be a better solution for infirm/unfit/no-quality-of-life animals that are out there.
September 3rd, 2010 at 11:06
Well said!
September 3rd, 2010 at 11:55
A solution for those horses would be ideal. I don’t know if there *has* to be one, though…the logistics are pretty daunting. There are rescue facilities, but those are (mainly, not exclusively) for animals with using potential. Maybe you have some suggestions?
September 3rd, 2010 at 15:07
Your arguement may be logical however as human beings our emmotions very strongly influence our rational decision making process even in financial decisions which don’t involve living breathing beings. I would beg to differ with the statement that we slaughter other “pet” animals such as dogs. Euthanasia is very different from slaughter and I think many would see euthnasia as a humane ending for many humans as well while I have yet to hear of anyone suggesting we slaughter our old infirm terminally ill relatives. If we to get completely rational about it we should have slaughter houses assocaited with medicaid funded long term care facilities or those with dementia who don’t know whats going on in the world and are a drain on our social services. Rationally those funds should be going to provide healthcare and education for the young. As I said we are not Rational beings but ones governed my emmotions and a sense of moral responsibility.
I certanly agree that killing a horse humanely is preferable to starving them to death but my conncern with slaughter is two fold. One that it makes is to simple and profitable simply to kill off an unwanted horse. I believe you have a moral responsibility to to look after your animals and that doesn’t go away simply because having the animal become inconvenient. However I will conceed that there are times when you cannot “afford” to maintian an animal (hell you could go on a decent cruise for a years cost of maintianing a horse) and no one wants them as a gift and it will be in the animals best interests to put them down. I have yet to hear of a slaughter house that will kill its animals in a stressfreee human manner. I would support a slaughter facility where there were strong regulations as to the humane treatment of the horses and only after animals in good health and potentially productive had had every effort made to find them a home. In fact I think it would be great if the slaughter houses were associated with Rescue places who would dispatch the animals in a caring manner and the proceeds used to help fund the Rescue side of the operation. Well it’s time for me to go and hug my Pig.
Signed: The Bunny Hugger
September 3rd, 2010 at 19:22
Patty – I agree with you 100%. And it needs to be pointed out that there are some totally unusable horses that are actually dangerous to be around – what would the bunny-huggers have us do with those? Would they like to adopt one?!
September 3rd, 2010 at 19:54
Not all horse owners agree. I emphatically do not agree. I am 100% opposed to horse slaughter for human consumption, and I have owned horses for over thirty years.
(And by the way, name-calling of people you disagree with does nothing to aid your argument…”bunny huggers” etc. Talk issues. Or I might start calling names back.)
Here is why I’m opposed. Where I live, a few hundred miles from a former horse slaughter facility in north Texas, the overseas market for horseflesh for human consumption raised the slaughter price for horses to the point that horse thieves became a serious threat. Unlike cattle-thievery, where brand inspectors and alert state police kept an eye on cattle movements and slaughter houses were somewhat tougher with their paperwork, horse-thievery operated much more smoothly, from the thieves’ point of view. Law enforcement usually considered the theft of one or two horses far less important than other crimes, and the fault of the owner…and only owners who discovered the theft fast enough, and did not delay to call the sheriff but drove (as fast as they could) to the slaughterhouse had a hope of finding their horse alive.
Thieves chose horses by the pound…the larger, more muscled horses brought them the most profit. Slaughterhouses didn’t have to take the rack-o-bones…they were getting choice, well muscled, sleek, purebred show and pleasure horses by the dozens and hundreds. Law enforcement in my area, before the Texas plant closed, regularly put out bulletins on all the precautions we were supposed to take. A lot of people worked in town and had their horses in the country…thieves came by day, cut fences or used bolt cutters on gates to get to the horses…the well-trained calm ones they caught and loaded; the others they left loose to run and injure themselves on the roads. By the time the kids got home from school and found the fence cut and their horse gone, the horse was already hundreds of miles away…and by the time the family could pile in the car and get those hundreds of miles to the slaughterhouse, the horse was dead.
When someone did get there in time (it happened on occasion) they found a horse that now needed vet care and retraining–it had been exposed to whatever the other horses on the truck had, often had kicks and bites and cuts and whip marks, and was a nervous wreck as well.
Neglected and abused horses existed alongside horse slaughter because the worst owners won’t bother to haul their horses to slaughter, and kill buyers don’t want them–they aren’t profitable. When the market was for dogfood and glue, the price was low enough to deter thieves…they’d spend more on gas hauling a horse than they’d get. But human consumption drives up the price…and you get horse thieves. Or, WE got horse thieves. What’s profitable are horses like my two.
The solution to “too many horses” goes back to breeders primarily…and in Texas started with the great tax-shelter-breeders of the late 60s and 70s. You had people
September 3rd, 2010 at 20:05
Hit SEND by accident….You had breeders who knew damn all about horse breeding producing foals for which they knew they had no market, in order to get a tax break. I used to follow breed magazines in several breeds and it was appalling–and I knew a guy like that–bought scrub mares and bred them every year. Or they’d breed lots and lots of mares in hopes of getting a small fraction of usable foals. I think people who breed horses like that should be required to euthanize their “culls”…it would teach them to be better breeders if they had to pay for their mistakes. (At this point it may be hard to remember that there have been breeders who were skilled and careful enough not to produce culls.)
Another approach would be to have horse owners deposit the cost of euthanization in an escrow fund….so if they found the horse too expensive to feed, they could just call in their prepaid service. The horse would still be dead, but it would be done humanely. (Of course it’s possible to put a horse down humanely…but it’s not economic compared to what’s been done.) I’ve paid for the vet to euthanize mine…it’s a responsibility, in my view, if I own an animal and it’s given me pleasure. (If you’re tired of your dog or cat do you sell it to someone as a research subject? If you do, I don’t want to know you.)
But horse slaughter for human consumption did not solve, and will not solve, the problem of abused, abandoned horses…it will only encourage horse thieves. They go for the easy horses who bring the biggest profit. My horses. Your horses. Any horses visible from a paved road that are in good flesh and gentle.
You may not have had that problem, but we certainly did, and so did every county up and down I-35 and for fifty miles on either side. That’s why I wrote my Senator and Congressman strongly urging a ban on the slaughter of horses for human consumption.
And let’s leave off the name-calling, shall we? I eat bunnies; I don’t hug them.
September 3rd, 2010 at 21:48
Elizabeth–interesting point of view of horse thieves that I had not considered. Thaks for your comments!
September 3rd, 2010 at 21:48
Um–that was THANKS
September 3rd, 2010 at 22:19
Richard, I’m sorry to disagree. We slaughter pet animals all the time, even if that word isn’t applied. What PETA has done to animals that were destined for their facilities–but never made it–is pure slaughter, not nearly as humane as food animals receive. (See the various and readily available reports on the situation in VA, along with the 95% kill rate for animals taken in by that group–even when the owners were surrendering them for rehoming.) Mind you, I don’t condone that–I think it should be stopped. But other public facilities–shelters, animal control, etc–also kill animals in a briskly efficient manner. Nothing like a beloved pet going to its final rest. These are the old, the infirm, the problematic. People who own these animals have had the option of surrendering them, or (less morally) simply turning them out on the street to become someone else’s problem until they’re picked up. What I hear you suggesting is that horse owners don’t deserve to have an analogous option.
Professionals such as Temple Grandin have devoted their lives to creating low stress conditions for animals heading in to a slaughter house. Never mind the industry’s motivations, which are varied (from public perception to effects on the meat to efficiency); the truth of it is that there are plenty of reasons for the industry to do it right. To assume they aren’t isn’t an point that hits home (although it’s emotionally successful).
To associate farm animals with our own ill family members is also emotionally successful, but not a valid argument. They aren’t the same and no one suggests that they are. That, I think, is part of the point.
Would I send my own irrevocably wounded horse off to a slaughterhouse? My own history proves conclusively that I wouldn’t, although I won’t go into detail here. Nor would I send my infirm and problematic pet to the shelter for inevitable euthanasia. I happen to feel it’s my responsibility to do otherwise. But that’s my personal choice. I don’t happen to think it’s appropriate to remove reasonable options from others because I would not choose to take that option.
About this matter, I know enough to know that there are things I don’t know (!), and that makes me unqualified to advocate strongly one way or the other. It may seem otherwise from my comments, but the truth is I don’t condone emotionalism as basis for argument from any view, and I think it’s worth playing devil’s advocate in order to get the truth of a matter.
Now I must go see what Elizabeth has to say…I see paragraphs!
September 3rd, 2010 at 22:23
Elizabeth, that was a fascinating real-life report of the potential unintended consequences of the “human consumption” slaughter biz–and interesting ideas regarding resolving the issue otherwise. I’m glad you posted!
September 7th, 2010 at 09:37
This could go on forever so I’ll try to keep it simple. We have a moral responsibility towards the animals we raise and keep. Thats a simple non religious based belief of mine following the “Do unto others asa you would have them do unto you”. Temple Grandin did show that it is possible to slaughter cattle humanely unfotunatley it also showed the callousness and lack of acceptance of such an approach. I would prefer the death of any creature to serve a purpose and appreciate those cultures that use every hide , hair, sinue and meat of the animals they kill. Thus in someways would prefer slaughter for horses if it was done in a caring manner however I just don’t beleive that has or will happen in a profit driven enterprise. By the way we don’t slaughter our pets, slaugher, kill, euthanise, assisted suicide etc are not all the same.
Well I’m off to hug a bunny if I can every catch one of them damn furry little buggers.
September 7th, 2010 at 14:01
Actually, Richard, I suspect we agree more than we don’t, but have very different styles of discourse.
I do believe it’s necessary to examine a situation from every viewpoint–without assuming on facts (yes, PETA in VA slaughtered pets, in every sense of the word, so it does happen–but that doesn’t make it right)–and what I’m concluding from this conversation is that the things have changed in ways that make certain aspects of large animal ownership difficult for the owners without having provided alternatives.
I agree that a profit-drive enterprise seems problematic. Wish there was a better answer there.
I’m grateful to Patty for putting this out there on the blog so I had a reason to think it through…
September 7th, 2010 at 19:03
I have been enjoying reading everyone’s point of view! Thank-you very much for your thoughtful and interesting responses! I still believe that for profit horse killing and use of the carcass should be an option. However, I see the problem with “for-profit” and “humane” that I hadn’t carefully considered as well as the horse thief issue that I was away of only peripherally. I thik the main thing is that we have either free or for profit “disposal” options for every other animal and there ought to be the same for horses. And I still think that since horses are big, we ought to use them once they are dead, if that is safe and the death process is humane. Of course, have I ever sent a horse to a slaugher facility? No. Don’t know if I could do it even if there were said option…..