Sweet! I’ve always liked mules (eventhough I’d still eat one).
But then, you look at animals as things, to use, make a buck off of, and throw away when they’re not useful any more. I doubt very much that you do in fact understand the bond involved here.
And can you perhaps quote where I claimed a “broad human health danger of the slaughter horses”? Other than noting that some horses are at some times medicated with some substances that are sometimes contraindicated for animals intended for human consumption, that is?
To follow up on this bit:
Phenylbutazone, also known as Butazolidin (“bute”) is an anti-inflammatory commonly administered to horses. My own horse is on a daily maintenance dose for arthritis. You can think of it as equine aspirin.
Gastrogard is used to treat ulcers in horses and comes with this warning:
Deworming products such as ivermectin and moxidectin are regularly given to horses. Scroll down on this page to the chart of products and indications for use.
This article does a good job of explaining all the health risks from consuming horses who’ve received commonly used medications.
But surely, you think, the meat exported to Europe is free of such substances? Think again.
I don’t think it is. The horses are bred to run and it’s not like they have a 250lb sitting on their back either, the jockeys weigh what, 180?
Not even, try more like 100 to 120 pounds.
Sorry for the delay, I lost track of the thread and didn’t see the reply.
I honestly did not come to my support of closing the US Slaughter houses easily. I consider myself a libertarian, and believe people should be free to do what they want as much as possible. I did not agree at all with that bill they snuck in that made internet gambling illegal. If you don’t want to gamble using the internet, then don’t, but don’t take away others ability to do that when it doesn’t hurt anyone else. I also don’t agree when I hear of laws that enable the government to take people’s property or people’s ability to do what they want on their land unless there is a very good reason to prohibit something. But there are times rules and regulations are needed, and in my research of this issue, I came to the conclusion that even with my libertarian leanings, I felt something should be done to stop the cruel treatment of horses.
I did not base my research on PETA or other groups I know to be “extreme” in their thinking. I talked to many people who are involved in this personally, and then found what they told me to be backed up by documentation. And my research has shown me that cases of abuse are very wide spread, the rule, rather than the exception. If I believed horse slaughter could be done in a humane way, and the horses would not suffer during transport or during the slaughter process, I would feel differently about this entire issue. But when I look at all the facts, I support the ban. Horsemeat is not consumed by people in the US. It has been that way for a long time. I don’t know why some cultures eat some animals and not others, but in the US we don’t eat dogs or cats or horses. So banning the slaughter of animals we don’t eat here seems very consistent with how we feel about those animals.
I really did do a lot of research before making my decision. Part of my reluctance to see the plants closed is that I felt closing the plants would put a burden on the existing horse rescue groups and might lead to worse treatment for horses, more horses being abandoned, starved and neglected. But after looking into that area, which was important to me as I work with a local horse rescue, I found that worry was not justified. Some of the links below will explain why.
The bottom line in weighing the pros and cons of this issue came down to my being convinced the amount of suffering by horses going to and being slaughtered was just too high to justify allowing it to go on. I could not stand the thought that one of the horses I bred and raised could have his last days end like the horses featured in the clips provided below. As long as the slaughter houses are open, there is a chance that could happen.
And I do understand about being leery of groups like PETA, so I will include info from sources I feel would not be considered “animal fanatics” as you put it.
Here are some of the sources to consider:
This one is from the Humane Society of the United States. I do not believe them to be “animal fanatics.” For example, on the subject of animal testing, they do not say it shouldn’t be done. They want it done in a way to minimize pain to the animal if possible. They promote better living conditions for the animals used in testing, not doing away with testing. And when a viable substitute is available, they would like animals not used if there a workable alternative. I feel that is a fair. They are not against all sport hunting, only that which is seen to be inhumane. I also think that is fair. Thisarticle also has a link with a video by the Humane Society which shows some of the things I mentioned.
This is from the Animal Welfare Institute. From looking over their website I don’t feel they would fit in the fanatical category. Here is their stance on animal testing:
They just want the current Federal Regulations observed and to reduce the pain and suffering in lab animals. I think that is fair.
This article sums up what I have heard first hand from those who have been to these slaughter houses.
http://www.awionline.org/pubs/Quarterly/winter02/blindeye.htm
This is United Animal Nations. They specialize in animals in crisis situations. Here is a link about the bills they are currently supporting. I don’t think anything on the list would be considered “fanatical”, just basic care and concern for animals. Some might be a bit controvesial, but I don’t think they rise to the level of being animal fanatics.
http://www.uan.org/index.cfm?navid=176
A look at their website shows they suggest things like taking kids to animal preserves rather than circuses, and decreasing the amount of meat people eat, not eliminate it. I don’t consider them to be too extreme; here is their page on the horse slaughter:
http://www.uan.org/index.cfm?navid=256
Another thing that affected my decision was that the towns that have these slaughter plants also want them gone. There are many articles like this one:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8JTDEF80.html
And many stories like this backing up other things I mentioned:
http://www.saplonline.org/news/texarkana.htm
From what I have heard first hand, this video showing how many times the captive bolt must be shot into horses heads is accurate. The video was shot by the Humane Farming Association. They may border on being fanatical; I don’t know much about them. But I will include the video as it does represent was has been repeated to me many times as to why horses should not be slaughtered like cows.
http://www.manesandtailsorganization.org/horses/HFA_Horse_long.m4v
Here is a bit more information about that captive bolt that is at the heart of many of the complaints:
http://www.manesandtailsorganization.org/captive_bolt.htm
And I don’t think the author of this study would qualify as an animal fanatic. It does have some interesting information about the stats of unwanted horses, which is backed up by other studies I have read and leads me to believe the horse rescue I work with will not be overwhelmed once the slaughter houses are shut down.
http://www.horse-protection.org/pdf/Relationship-of-Abuse-to-Slaughter.pdf
So I really haven’t jumped on this band wagon just because I like horses. I first heard of this problem when I became involved in the horse rescue and met people who routinely see the horses crowded on to cattle trucks to begin their journey to the slaughter houses. Since then I have done enough research to feel this problem isn’t being exagerated by do gooder groups that just like to stir up trouble and make headlines. There is a lot of unnessasary suffering by horses because of the slaughter houses, and I am hoping to see that end soon.
A significant dent, yes, but many greys that don’t make the grade are still killed. My brother has worked in greyhound rescue for years www.GreytRescue.org I asked him how many are still killed, with all the rescue groups around the country. He said it’s hard to pin down the numbers, but they estimate that about half of the dogs are rescued. The more adopters they find, the more dogs will be rescued.
Some of the rescued dogs didn’t make it through the training, some, like one of my brother’s dogs, are retired after a successful career, and the rescuers occasionally get a few puppies. Greyhound puppies are unbelievably cute, and they are adopted instantly. Puppies only get rescued when the parentage is not certain, and they can’t be registered.
While the Belgian owned horse slaughterhouses are well known, they aren’t the only places horses are butchered for meat. My state’s laws prohibit selling horsemeat for human food. However, if a customer brings in a horse to be butchered and takes all the meat himself, that’s legal. I’m told it’s better than venison, but not as good as beef. At horse auctions, injured and mean horses usually are sold to the rendering plants, but a few are bought to be taken for meat.
So nothing that isn’t from animal rights fanatics. At least someone provided valid drug cites, though nothing that argues against getting horses rendered for non-human consumption.
I really like all kinds of animals. I can appreciate a good dog or a momma quail with her babies in tow. Heck, I’ve even liked a couple of cats. But I don’t get pissed off at someone shooting a strange dog that wonders onto to their place or when hunting season comes around either.
Same CNN puff piece:
"The leg was broken in three places. One bone shattered into 20 pieces.
His initial surgery lasted five hours and required 27 pins and a stainless steel plate. From that point on, the colt had numerous ups and downs."
Before they killed it, it was in pain. It’s quality of life was gone. If you want to play an emotional card, the card reads cruel selfish bastards kept a crippled horse alive unnecessarily.
I do appreciate your drug cites. But nothing about them points out that horses shouldn’t sent to renderedering plants. I doubt animal rights fanatics that oppose slaughter do so because of any human health danger. More than likely it is their bizzarre, unnatural, immoral, psychotic view of animals that leads to their opposition.
Don’t forget “emotional”
Well, maybe uberly overly emotional.
Are you even reading the replies? I think you have it in your mind anyone that would like to see unnessary pain and suffering of animals must be an animal fanatic. There can be crazy animal rights people who have rather bizarre ideas of how animals need to be treated, but what we are talking here is not extreme.
There is nothing saying horses shouldn’t be going to rendering plants, because that is not what the current legislation is about. The bill is not seeking to prevent people from sending their horses to rendering plants. Why are you even bringing that up? There is nothing preventing people who want to put their horse down from putting their horse down. If a horse is lame or in pain it should be put down. This legislation has nothing to do with that or with rendering plants.
This legislation does not seek to end the human consumption of horsemeat. This bill will not change any current legislation about where horses can be consumed for human consumption. The places that currently do eat horsemeat will be free to continue to do so. Ending horse slaughter in the US will not stop the cultures who now do eat horse meat from eating horse meat.
This bill deals specifically with ending horse “slaughter” in the US. Horse slaughter is a specific term used to describe the current system in place for processing horses for human consumption. Horses that are going to be eaten by humans must go through a different process than those that are sent to the rendering plants. This distinction seems to be lost on you. And it the main focus of the the bill so you really should acknowledge that.
To be consumed by humans, the horses must be brought to the plant alive. They must be living when their throats are slit to be bled out. There is no way to do this without the horses suffering. They suffer from the time they are put on cattle trucks, which are designed for the much shorter, much calmer cattle. They suffer through the entire shipping process. Then once at the plant, they suffer because there is no way ensure a horse is rendered unconscious before they are strung up and bled out.
Do you consider it an unnatural, immoral, psychotic view of animals to not want to see them suffer and endure an incredible amount of pain? Do you think it is only “animal fanatics” who agree with the laws in place that make it illegal for someone to beat and abuse their dog? You were very quick to condemn the Jacksons for making a decision that you felt was cruel because their animal would needlessly suffer. Well if you are thinking that was wrong of them to put their horse in position to needlessly suffer, then you should support this bill.
Horses that are slaughtered for human consumption suffer much more in their last few days than Barbaro did in his entire nine months in the veternary hospital.
All this current legislatation deals with is preventing horses from going through the horrible trauma that slaughtering of horses involves.
This bill just focuses on the fact that the way horse slaughter is done in the three remaining US plants is cruel. The slaughter plants are not interested in changing the way they do things to make it less cruel. So we would like to see them shut down. That is the only way to stop the suffering of the horses who are now sent to the slaughter houses. It would likely be different if horsemeat was consumed in the United States. There would likely be more plants meaning they would be more closely regulated. Methods would likely be developed to minimize the pain and suffering of the animals to be slaughtered. But with there only being three slaughter houses in the US, they don’t regulate the way they do with cattle or other animals bred for comsumption. Horses are considered companion animals and not regulated the same way. This is why their horrible treatment continues.
If the slaughter houses would adopt rules and follow them that would insure the horses would not have to suffer to become steaks, I would feel entirely different about this issue. But they fight any attempts to make the process more humane. So considering the fact that we don’t eat horses in the US anyway, why do we let a situation continue that causes so much distress and is so cruel to our horses?
I don’t think wanting to see an end to a process that involves so much needless pain and suffering to horses makes one an animal fanatic.
Most cities I know of have specific legal ways to put a dog down humanely. They can be given drugs, some places allow a bullet to the head. But I doubt it is legal anywhere to repeatedly stab your dog to death. And I don’t think you have to be a fanatical animal person to agree that laws that make it illegal to cause unnessary pain and suffering to their dog on its way to be put down, and during the process makes them animal fanatic.
There is no mention of the danger to human health by consuming horsemeat because that is not what this bill is about. The bill doesn’t make any such claim.
I mentioned that I personally would not eat horsemeat because I know first hand that some of the horses that are being slaughtered are pumped full of illegal drugs. I know they can go from the racetrack where they have been given many of the drugs that Eddy Teddy Freddy mentioned one day, then to the horse auction the next day. That day they are loaded up, and depending how far they have to travel, and are at the slaughter house within a day, two at most. They are then slaughtered within another day or two. I know from studying drugs in race horses that those drugs are not out of their systems within that amount of time. So I made the statement that I wouldn’t want to consume that meat for that reason, in addition to the fact that to me it would be like eating someone’s pet dog.
And I don’t agree that the Humane Society is a group of animal fanatics. They don’t say animals should not be eaten, or used for sport, or for animal testing. They are fine with those things as long as the animals are not unnecessarly abused in the process. They seek to minimize suffering of animals. That is not fanatical, that is just being humane which is much different.
So the issues you continue to bring up aren’t even part of this. We aren’t talking about preventing people from putting their horses down. We aren’t talking about shutting down the rendering plants. We aren’t talking about preventing people who eat horsemeat from eating it. We just want to eliminate one very cruel unnecessary process that is currently taking place in the US.
Boxing is cruel, auto racing is cruel.
Just because it’s voluntary doesn’t make it nice.