Sadly, more and more horses are being abandoned out west.
The situation for marginal horses — horses whose poor physical condition or disposition makes them targets for slaughter — is even worse, after a court ruling sought by animal-rights groups effectively shut down the U.S. horse slaughter industry last year.
The result is that a growing number of unwanted horses are being starved or turned loose to fend for themselves in the U.S. West, according to animal welfare advocates.
“What concerns me is a fate worse than slaughter,” said Temple Grandin, professor of animal science at Colorado State University and an authority on the handling of livestock such as horses. “We’ve got people turning horses loose in fields, dropping horses off in the night — my worst nightmares are coming true.”
And what caused this situation?
Horses eat hay made from either grass or alfalfa, or a mix of both, and a modest amount of grain. Prices fluctuate, but in east central Idaho, hay prices have risen to $145 from $120 per ton a year ago, a jump of 21 percent. In northern Idaho it costs $220 per ton and as much as $300 per ton in parts of California. Feeding a horse can cost $2,000 a year or more.
Ok. I can understand that. Prices for everything have skyrocketed in the last year. But, I have a feeling that well-intentioned, but misguided, policies have led to this sad story.
But the romantic concept of freeing a tamed horse to roam the West’s wide open spaces bears no resemblance to the reality, said Kirk Miller, livestock investigator in Idaho and Montana for the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
“They have no survival instinct in the wild, no clue as to what’s dangerous to eat, no knowledge of how to grub for food under the snow,” he said.
Miller and Colorado State’s Grandin are among animal experts who say the campaign led by the Humane Society of the United States to end domestic horse slaughter was well-intentioned but misguided.
Now the tens of thousands of American horses marked for slaughter are shipped to Canada and Mexico, where long, stressful journeys end in what some horse advocates say can be unduly painful deaths.
Most horses are slaughtered for human consumption, with Europe and Asia providing markets for their meat.
Some horse associations are siding with the Humane Society in its fight to end export of horses for slaughter altogether. But others are seeking to re-establish processing in the United States to broaden the outlet for unwanted horses and to ensure the animals are killed by a mechanical method approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Keith Dane, director of equine protection for the Humane Society, said for Americans to have their horses killed for their meat would be akin to sending their pet dogs to slaughter for human consumption.
But unlike its canine counterpart, a horse weighs an average of 1,000 pounds and disposal of its carcass after Humane Society-recommended euthanasia has become burdensome. Where permitted by law and where able, owners can bury carcasses on their own land or pay several hundred dollars in assorted fees to deposit the remains at a local landfill.
Those complications may be behind what state livestock officials and federal land managers in the West say is a spike in the number of horses shot dead and dumped on public lands.
There you go.
Look, I love animals, and I look poorly on those who abuse and mistreat animals; however, misguided and foolish policies endorsed by “animal rights activists” have led to this sad story. Now, government controlled methods of maintaining and handling horses have been shuttered, with the result being the number of sick and abandoned horses reaching unheard of levels.
And what angers me the most is that those groups who declare themselves the protectors of animals have created this disaster. And they refuse to answer for their actions.
Misguided policies? How about irresponsible owners and breeders? How about you don’t bring more horses into the world than you can afford to care for? Since the same meat men are buying the same number of horses at auction and the same number are being slaughtered, obviously it is not the kill houses shutting down that is causing the problems you described. Slaughter is still very much available so how do you explain horses being abandoned? How do you explain the abandonment when the domestic kill houses were open? The reported cases were just as high, if not higher, than they are now.
Nice to see you stayed on topic by blaming the owners. Then what is to be done to owners and breeders to prevent over population. Your opening line sounded similar to the “zero population growth people”, but I digress.
I may be wrong, but I don’t recall mentioning that abandonment never existed before last year. As for increased abandonment, then what are your conclusions and evidence? If there are slaughterhouses, are they still in operation to handle downing sick animals, or are they food oriented? Show me the proof.
Finally, while criticizing my thesis about misguided policies, you never came out in support of shutting down the slaughterhouses. Which is it?
Eddie, she’s probably the same type of person that would let a horse with a shattered leg die slow while she was “attempting to heal it” rather than put it down to end it’s misery.
All of the horses going to slaughter are owned by someone. If they took responsibility for the horses they made a conscious decision to own or breed, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The meat men aren’t buying sick and downed animals. They want healthy horses with meat on their bones. They make their profits on the price per pound. According to the USDA, 96% of the horses going to slaughter are sound and fit.
Old Iron, no, I would not try to heal a horse with a shattered leg. If the horse could not be rehabilitated, as with Eight Belles, I would call my vet and have him humanely euthanized. I would not subject him to being trucked off to unfamiliar surroundings, an auction and being packed into a truck to be butchered alive. BTW-it is illegal to send a lame or blind horse to slaughter.
Of course I am in support of shutting down slaughter – not just the domestic kill houses but the transport over the borders. Our horses deserve better. Slaughter is done in this country. Two states have already tried to pass resolutions, amendments and bills to revive slaughter. All the legislation was shot down before the ink was dry. Most recently, the industry suffered another blow when the AG in Texas refused to allow horse meat to be shipped through DFW.
All of the horses going to slaughter are owned by someone. If they took responsibility for the horses they made a conscious decision to own or breed, we wouldn’t be having this discussion
Sooooo…..what do you recommend to help remedy the situation, besides shutting down slaughterhouses? Do you recommend more taxes and restrictions? Do you understand and comprehend the consequences of what happens if you get your way?
Pass a law that the animal rights people must take care of the horses but without government help. Or stop breeding horses so that they become an endangered species.
^Yeah, but both of those would require too much effort on the part of the animal rights crowd.
Those who advocated to close the slaughterhouses are NOT to blame for this “disaster”. That distinction belongs to those who bred and bred with the expectation that they would always have an out; let’s just get a few bucks from the meatman if we don’t get the right color combination. Your disaster has been going on for years. Abandonment? Check. Abuse? That’s nothing new. Shipping out of the country? Yep, was happening when the U.S. slaughterhouses were open.
Let’s talk about those wonderfully governmental controlled slaughterhouses. You know, I’d rather have the USDA in places that inspect meat that Americans actually eat, but too bad that they’re too underfunded to even do that. I’m sure that the USDA did a much better job in horse slaughterhouses, since the Congress voted to de-fund that process, and the industry found a way around that by paying the USDA directly. Can you say, conflict of interest? The U.S. courts certainly did.
Horses aren’t the only animals being abondoned in record numbers. The current sad state of the U.S. economy clearly shows that many Americans have been living well beyond their means. But no matter how we got here, it doesn’t justify the continuation of a brutally cruel industry and to continue rewarding irresponsibility.
By the way, I donate to several rescue organizations on a monthly basis. Some of that money has gone towards euthanization when needed. I supported closing the slaughterhouses and still do. I will answer for my decision, but apologize for it, absolutely not.
Again, why should anyone but the owner be responsible for caring for their horses? We know the consequences of our actions because we have history to prove it. Over several years, the slaughter counts dropped from over 400,000 horses down to 100,000. That’s 300,000 less horses that were slaughtered each year. What happened to the 300,000 horses that weren’t slaughtered each year? There were no horses wandering the streets and no increases of abuse and neglect. Look at it from another angle. Suppose the European meat market dried up. The kill buyers would be gone. Slaughter exists to fill the demand for meat, not as an outlet for people that want to dump horses. What would the owners and breeders do then? Don’t you think people would have enough common sense to adjust as they did when the slaughter counts dropped dramatically? Why is this any different?
As far as restrictions, I don’t think that is the answer. I would, however, recommend some type of license for breeding that would make it cost prohibitive for these fools that breed anything that moves. They are causing any overpopulation problems and the reputable owners and breeders have spoken out loudly on this issue. Many in the thoroughbred industry are working on a retirement fund for horses so they can be cared for in their retirement from racing. Many TB owners are already doing this. There are organizations such as Old Friends that take retired race horses. Many have been retired to this farm and are being supported by their owners. I visited last year and the horses are magnificent. They have been given the opportunity to live out their golden years in peace rather than on a European plate after giving their all on the race track.
Slaughter has been allowed to flourish without any of the rules and regulations that the cattle industry must follow. The ambiguous regulations we had for horse slaughter were ignored; especially the last few years when the kill houses were paying for the inspectors. Start requiring coggins and chain of heath certificates from original ownership and you’ll see the meat men disappear because the owners aren’t going to want to spend the money on the paperwork. They’re going to want a lot more than $200 for their horse and the meat men aren’t going to pay it. The pro slaughter folks want slaughter as a dumping ground. Try to do that with cattle and see what happens.
I would, however, recommend some type of license for breeding that would make it cost prohibitive for these fools that breed anything that moves.
Then who do you want to regulate this and monitor the licenses? Which governmental agency, if any? Will we have to pay more in taxes to live according to your wishes?
Lisa:
Then what do you suggest, oh wise one from the People’s Republic of Madison, WI? You are sure willing to defend the lawsuits, but I couldn’t find a whole heck of a lot of alternative solutions from you.
But no matter how we got here, it doesn’t justify the continuation of a brutally cruel industry and to continue rewarding irresponsibility.
Wow, kinda sounds like what the anti-abortion crowd has been saying for 35 plus years. But I digress.
I will answer for my decision, but apologize for it, absolutely not.
Fair enough. But I am sure you are knowledgeable about the results of the actions of the left, such as the fact that banning DDT has led to the revival of fatal malaria in Africa, but I digress.
But with the left, it is never the results that matter, only the intent.
Point / counter point; good call Eddie on the comparison between horse slaughter and abortion. Strange how someone would have such a strong-willed stance on a subject such as horse slaughter but would not thing to translate this over to their own species. Also nothing like more government regulation to solve a problem. Always works…. right?
I don’t live in Madison, never did. Don’t work there either, so I don’t know how your All-Knowingness came to that conclusion. Actually, I live and work in two different counties, much different than the climate in Dane. But wait, I am invited to a cook-out today, and my friend’s new house is probably just tucked inside the Dane county line. I better make sure that communism doesn’t rub off on me. (And I thought they were staunchly Republican!)
We’ve somehow managed to bring abortion into the discussion (talk about getting off topic) and ANOTHER assumption that I wouldn’t translate this into my own species. And DDT in Africa? What disease are we re-introducing to the country when we stop horse slaughter? Responsibility?
Old Iron, why must the pro folks always inject abortion into a discussion on horse slaughter? If you want to talk about abortion, start another thread on an appropriate blog. This is about horses. Unfortunately, we need regulations because without them, you allow people like Michael Vick to abuse animals for profit, without consequences. People use the property rights argument. Fair enough but owning an animal doesn’t give you the right to abuse or neglect the animal. The property rights of an owner that has had his horse stolen and sent to slaughter out trumps the rights of an owner that wants to send his horse to slaughter. If the owner doesn’t know right from wrong, how do you protect the animals without laws and regulations? Take the irresponsible breeders. How do you teach someone common sense? If they can’t figure out they need to be able to care for animals they bring into the world, if they can’t sell them, how do you fix it? Do you let them continue until it’s unmanageable and then expect everyone else to pay to care for them? Do you let the animals suffer because they didn’t have the common sense not to continue breeding? With the TBs, don’t you think the owners should take a portion of the horse’s winnings to provide for a retirement? After all, the horse earned the money. They ran their hearts out. Do you think it’s right to use an animal for profit and then discard them like an old shoe when they can no longer earn?
Eddiebear, I see you chose to zero in on one sentence but dismissed the counterpoints of my response. Why do the pro folks always do that? You give them a response and they either ignore the facts or change the subject to abortion, as Old Iron did. Just once, I’d like to see a pro person say, okay, that makes sense, you have a point. Instead, they just move on. I have been involved in the anti slaughter efforts for two years. I have done extensive research on both sides because when I first heard about this, I wanted to get the facts to make an informed decision. I lobbied in Washington DC in March. I attended several of the Cavel trials. I have not seen one compelling reason from the pro side that is convincing and fact based in favor of slaughter. They hire PR firms to pump out articles without basis. When you ask for the sources and facts, they ignore you. It’s always, I read in an article or I heard so and so say they saw abandoned horses and keep circulating the same false information as fact. They pay-off legislators to block the bills. Do they think we’re that stupid that we can’t research the PAC $$ and follow the money trails? Do they think we can’t research the affiliation of pro slaughter organizations to their ties with the kill house owners? Did Beavers think her perjured testimony before Congress wouldn’t become public record? Now, they are using closing the domestic slaughter houses, instead of the economic conditions for all the horse woes. Yes, I’m sure horses are being abandoned because people can’t afford to feed themselves but that is not the fault of closing the domestic kill houses. These people are abandoning all their animals – cats, dogs, goats, etc. There is no mention of that, only horses. That is a ridiculous article in favor of slaughter because the pro side is shooting down their own argument. Slaughter is still available through the same channels so why aren’t those horses going to slaughter? The people that abandoned don’t send their horses to slaughter. They didn’t when the domestic kill houses were open and they aren’t now. The numerous articles on abandoned horses have been investigated. The reports are available on-line to anyone that chooses to read them. With rare exception, they are false. When the facts (reports, data from the reporting agencies, quotes from the local authorities, etc.) are presented they ignore them and keep circulating the bogus articles. I was contacted by a student at a University that was having a debate on horse slaughter. The University programs are headed by pro slaughter professors. Even the student was pro slaughter until he started researching for the debate. I suspect I was contacted because I sent a letter to one of the professors that had published an on-line article on her “research” on horse slaughter. Guess who won the debate, hands down? The reason was because the anti-slaughter team had facts to back every statement made and pro side didn’t have any facts to dispute their statements.
We are all willing to listen and research. This is an emotional issue but both sides must deal in facts. Twisting language in the bills, as the AQHA did to suit their purposes, are jumped on and proven false. Articles of abandoned horses and abuse/neglect can easily be proven false with calls to the authorities. Calling out senators that oppose the bill as an argument for slaughter doesn’t go far when you research and find out they received hefty donations from pro slaughter organizations.
Lisa:
Your IP said Madison. If you don’t live there, I stand corrected.
As for “injecting” abortion, I am personally ambivalent, though I find it funny that a person who cares so much about animals would use the same logic and words as some people who oppose abortion.
As for DDT, I admit it was a sidebar, though the unintended consequences of an action need to be considered.
And if I “zeroed” in on just one comment, so what? If you are going to argue/debate, don’t let any loose strands exist. And I know for a fact that it would have been done to me if I had brought up incoherent points.
Unfortunately, we need regulations because without them, you allow people like Michael Vick to abuse animals for profit, without consequences.
Oh, so who is going off on tangents now?
Wow, eddiebear – you won’t debate my response. Does that mean you agree with my comments? Why was Michael Vick a tangent? You or Old Iron made a comment about more regulations. My comment was on the subject – it was animal related and an example of why regulations/laws are needed to protect animals. Dog fighting like horse slaughter is form of animal abuse so they are related. A human having an abortion is not related to horse slaughter. DDT is not related to horse slaughter unless they’re spraying the horses with DDT at the kill houses – LOL!
^No, I don’t agree.
I was just pointing out that while I was criticized for bringing up abortion, then bringing up tangents such as Michael Vick was just as incorrect.
So, you want regulations? Who will enforce? Who will pay? We already pay enough in taxes and are regulated to death. Much of it to “protect animals”. Do you want more?
I didn’t say I wanted more regulations; I said why we have regulations. Why do you keep twisting my words? I’ve said several times that nobody but the owner is responsible for caring for their animals. If owners are abusing, neglecting or abandoning their animals, they should be reported and arrested. It’s already a crime so no need for legislation there. For owners that want to dump their horses, make them pay, it will stop it. It could be as simple as the auctions charging a deposit that would cover euthanasia. If the owners can’t sell their horses and don’t take them back, the auction isn’t stuck. In fact, I’m sure the vets at the auctions could provide the service at a nominal cost and the auction could make a profit. There are many options that won’t cost the tax payers a dime. The pro folks just don’t want to look for them. They created the problems and need to look for answers, not us.
So what don’t you agree with? What have I stated that is incorrect?
Eddie, you use an IP address to make assumptions about where I am and subsequently, who I am. And because you THINK my words sound like something you heard from the abortion debate, well, then you KNOW that’s what I feel about that. Your last response attributed a quote to me that wasn’t even mine.
As far as regulations go, it would be great if we had less, but to quote my husband, a cop and former Marine (not exactly a liberal by any means), “Too many people don’t have a f$##in’ clue.” If your local humane society paid people to surrender their unwanted animals, what do you think would happen to the unwanted pet populations? Would those people get a clue? Most definitely not.
But it doesn’t really matter what your political affiliation is, your next president will be a supporter of the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. Clinton, Obama, and McCain are all co-sponsors of the current legislation. McCain not conservative enough for you? Take a look at some of the other Republicans that support this legislation; in fact, the previous House that voted to approve the legislation was Republican-controlled. Consequently, your attempt to label anyone arguing you as the evil liberal is pointless. You’ve got plenty of conservatives, ones that feel the same ways that you do about regulation, that oppose horse slaughter in the U.S.
But then how do you make the owners more responsible?
You don’t. What you can do is remove the incentive. Slaughter pays the irresponsible to continue being irresponsible. Do you honestly think if they didn’t get paid to dump their horses, they would continue? As Lisa said, if we started paying people to dump their animals at humane facilities, the pet overpopulation would explode. It’s no different with horses. The kill houses are not providing a service.
I stand corrected. I like seeing a somewhat honest debate where most parties (except me of course) are keeping most of their emotions in check to argue an interesting, logical point. Not that I am choosing sides by no means as I believe that a free market will regulate itself just fine with only LIMITED governmental oversight, but I do have to admit that Vicki and Lisa have done some coherent research on the topic.
You guys ever think about attacking this thing from the consumer’s standpoint? The best way to eliminate a product that you disagree with is not to have a demand for said product, not over-regulate it to the point that, like foie gras, you create an underground upswell of customer demand. The thing that needs to be changed is not the provider’s ability to provide said service but the (and I hate to say this because I have had horse meat and… meh.) minds of the consumer. Two pretty effective tactics that have been used is the villianization of the product itself (a la children’s toys as choking hazards) or product substitution (think soy turkey).
Use the market instead of the government. Now all you have to do is find a vehicle to effectively deliver your message…
There is no market in the U.S. for horsemeat as it is all shipped for consumers overseas. Of course, then when that point is made, the pro-slaughter folks accuse us of pushing our values on the world. “The cow is sacred in India!” they say. “They don’t tell us what to eat!” Well, I don’t know of any American companies operating in India that are raising cattle there and shipping the beef out to us here. If I’m wrong about this, please let me know.
Actually, I have no idea why Europeans would want to import horsemeat from us when they don’t want anything to do with our beef. While the beef industry has plenty of its own problems to deal with, at least cattle here are raised with the intent to become food. That’s definitely not the case with horses, as was recently documented by a segment on HBO’s Real Sports. I didn’t see it, but heard that it followed a horse off of the track to the slaughterhouse. Why anyone would want to brag about the freshness of that meat is beyond me. Drugs given to enhance a racehorse’s performance certainly aren’t compatible with human consumption.
Old Iron, first, if there was an award that the anti slaughter presented, you would have it. You are the first, and I mean the first, to actually engage a thought processes on any comment thread that I’ve seen in two years!
Your suggestion is an excellent suggestion but we have no control over the consumers. The US cannot force their cultures on other countries. I will say that Canada and the UK are picking up momentum in their anti horse slaughter efforts but even if slaughter was banned, those are not the big consumers. But as you stated, there are ways to make the cost prohibitive. One has already happened. The refusal to allow horse meat to be shipped through DFW in Texas, means their shipping costs from Mexico are much higher. Since the pro folks want to classify horses as livestock, let’s treat them as livestock by requiring coggins and health certificates that must track to the original owner. Those are regulations that are already in place for livestock so new regulations wouldn’t be needed. That would eliminate the thefts – no more quick buck for a stolen horse. Of course, horses would be denied the medication they need and there goes racing and every other sport and service they perform. Since horses are not livestock (raised and bred as food animals) do you think the racing industry could exist without the drugs they use? Do you think the mounted police are going to use ailing animals? Do you think the therapy facilities that treat the autistic would use horses that aren’t sound? Or the horses used for therapy to regain balance for our soldiers with head injuries or children with disabilities? That to me is the distinction between livestock and horses. I would also point out that many of the horses used in therapy came from horses bound for slaughter. I think that speaks volumes.
Since the airing of the HBO special on race horse slaughter, I’m sure America’s dirty little secret is no longer a secret. I’ve seen many blogs and comment threads where people are not going to watch or attend races. To keep the debate honest, they were mostly because of the breakdowns, not slaughter but I’ve seen many comments from the public that were horrified this was going on and I’m seeing more and more outrage from the public.
It is not going to be utopia, i.e. ban the transport and all is well. The economy is terrible and we all have to make adjustments. Horses are expensive animals to maintain and something everyone should be aware of before taking ownership. They need to be able to provide for care in life and death. If someone is depending on $200 for a horse, I would say they are in big trouble. I think what irritates me the most is those that feel the kill houses are providing a service to rid us of unwanted horses. They are in it for the money. They pay an owner $200 and make thousands off that horse. If they were providing a service, they would be rounding up the horses and not have to pay for them. If there are all these abandoned horses, don’t you think they would be grabbing them left and right? The kill houses don’t check ownership or check to see if they’re stolen. The people that are abandoning are abandoning all their animals. I live in Illinois and I’m constantly reading about families that move and leave their pets behind. How can you blame that on the domestic kill houses being closed or blame anything on the absence of slaughter when slaughter is just as available as when the domestic houses were open? Make the owners pay to dump their horses or just drop them off as you do with household pets and you’ll see the “unwanted” horse population disappear. As the pro side keeps saying, they need slaughter so their horses aren’t neglected. Okay, then why do they have to be paid? As I’ve said, remove the incentive and see what happens.
Please check out this recent article about a situation in Wisconsin (very near Madison, Eddie):
http://www.oregonobserver.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2&ArticleID=359
Now whatever you feel about private property rights, you’ve got to admit that this woman is in way over her head. Does she have a clue? I wish she did. These horses don’t have to be in this situation, but she is adamantly denying the help that’s offered. If she had half a brain, she’d accept it and the agencies involved could be using their resources somewhere else. If U.S. slaughterhouses were still open, do you think would she use that option? I highly doubt it. There’s a lot more going on here than being able to sell a horse.
Actually, I do see the market having an effect on this situation. There are some that have already gotten out of the business because they realize that they can’t afford to continue. Even people who love horses are realizing that they can no longer maintain the responsibility. While horse exports to Mexico were up in 2007, I believe that I saw that the total number of U.S. horses slaughtered last year was down about 20K from the year before. Now is not the time to go backwards to pay people for breeding crap horses when they had no business being in the industry in the first place. Horses are not going to become endangered as someone here had said; what you will get is people who know what they’re doing, have the resources to do it right, and will produce quality horses that will command a price they deserve.
Just because you can make money on something doesn’t mean you should. The U.S. could export a whole lot of other goods and services besides horsemeat if that were the case. But that’s another blog. Thanks for an interesting discussion.
Lisa Peterson
I agree that a woman such as she should get help.
I don’t not how relevant this is, but this seems to be why animal neglect/hoarding rules were created. And I support those laws.
“Old Iron, first, if there was an award that the anti slaughter presented, you would have it”.
Heh. I gots me an award.
Dust off the bowling trophies!
Wow I’m really the first comment to this awesome post?