[Sandra-A1]

I still say that I think it is wrong to try to legislatively (sp?) force ones beliefs and opinions on others. I am against legislating morality and I am against this Bill.
While the intentions are good it is still wrong to pass laws that FORCE your beliefs about horses and livestock on others. It is not like there are not already laws in place that deal with the human treatment of these animals.
I also cannot see any reason to not process and ship meat...of any type of livestock to any other country. This country is known as the land of plenty and for providing food for others in need. Why should we stop now? What gives you, or anyone else, the right to tell me, or anyone else in the world what we can or cannot eat? This Bill can be the first step in doing just that. PETA can twist and turn it into a legal precedent...a first step in telling the American people that they just took meat of any kind off their table.
Stranger things have happened before!
This country was founded on the right for people to decide for themselves...and as long as we are doing not harm to another humam being we are supposed to be allowed the right to choose what is best for us.
This bill is the first step in taking away our right to choose for ourselves!
Next will come telling us that we can no longer ride and enjoy our horses, we can no longer own dogs and cats....and yes it can happen! All it will take is this FIRST step....!

Undue Influence
PETA Lies
PETA Lies Cont.

[Blistering Winds]

Actually, Peta may not be 100% involved in the creation of the bill, but I can Guarantee they NOTICED that clause as well! I've said before, I chatted with an active Peta member (friend, still don't know how we stay friends with stuff like this....lol) She would not comment on that portion. Why? Because she wants it to pass!

Just because it wasn't the "REASON" for the statement, doesnt mean it can't be played off of with really good lawyers. Tak that statement out, and come up with a way for the unwanted (YES UNWANTED) horses will be financed, and more definition of "probable cause for a cop with a carrot up his rear" and I might support the current bill.

But with the AVMA Not liking the way things are written and "proposed". I have to go with my gut instincts and follow the MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS on this one.


You say those horses have homes who go to auction? What of those who lost their jobs and auction is the last resort before their horses DIE of starvation? My friends went through that. Waited as long as they could, when all the hay/grain was gone after they lost their job, and couldn't get another one yet, they had NO CHOICE but to sell at auction. ONly one found a home. The rest would have gone back home and starved to death. Because no one could buy them. EXCEPT the killers. So, they had either a 14 day death, or a 1 minute death. Personally, give me the 60 seconds of agony instead of 14 days of agony.

What will happen if I want to take a 10 horse trailer over the boarder for a show? What is to say I"m not going to take the 10 horses to slaughter? What measures (which are NOT written) is to say that I'm telling the truth? What if I am and they take my horses away from me and land me in jail wrongfully?

This WILL Limit the shows in and out of canada because people will be AFRAID to cross the boarder (if they can) to go to a show, rodeo, or other equine events. Even to just go up and RIDE if they please!! Same with Mexico. I know a couple that likes to drive down to Cozamel and they take their horses. This Bill, due to the lack of probable cause instructions, if they get a ****** off cop, he can say, NOPE< I don't believe you and confiscate those horses and land them in JAIL!!!

Communist in my opinion. Just plain COMMUNIST!

[DBurr]

Originally Posted by Blistering Winds

http://www.ahdf.org/pdf/Horse%20Slau...Prevention.pdf

Here is the copy of the proposal

PLEASE READ THE FIRST PAGE VERY CAREFULLY!!!! AS WRITTEN, it endangers Transport of horses for ANY REASON.

"To Prevent the slaughter of horses in and from the United States for Human Consumption by prohibiting the slaughter of horses for human consumption and by prohibiting the trade and transport of horsefleash and live horses intended for human consumption and for OTHER PURPOSES.

HELLO??? Wake up people. PETA has their hands on this bill and just WAITING for it to pass!!!

The "For other purposes" phrase shows up in most of the bills before Congress.

Here is a random bill sponsored by Congressman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). You will note its use of "for other purposes."

• To amend title 18, United States Code, to discourage spyware, and for other purposes. (H. R. 4661)

This bill has to do with computers, however I don't hear people saying "My God, this bill could prohibit me from using my computer! It could prohibit me from installing any software at all!"

You're creating a tempest in a teapot.

[Blistering Winds]

Well, that is their deal, if they dont want to say anything, that is their deal.

This is ours. We have more "fears' and are more active than the computer geeks I guess. (no offense, as my dad and i are geeks ourselves..)

[charmedlife]

Originally Posted by space_cowboy

Whats up with all these PETA fans invading our forum??

I am ALL FOR horse slaughter! Until people quit breeding their backyard stallion to their backyard mare we need the horse slaughter to keep our industry going and to prevent those unwanted backyard horses from starving. I know it's soo sad and yaddayaddayadda..... It's also life! Cows are born to be meat - thats why most people breed them. I have purchased several horses on their way to slaughter (that I knew had potential and that had great conformation) and turned them into wonderful horses and got them amazing lifelong homes. But I don't want a 23 year old sickle hocked, toed in, sway backed mare! I have no use for one and no one else does either - therefore she ends up at a slaughter house and is humanly put down and her body is put to good use!

......I COMPLETELY agree with you about backyard breeders. Look at some of the headings on this great and active forum about "to breed or not to breed?" Does anyone here ever take the time educate these people about overbreeding ..? Lastly,...For that sway backed, sickle hocked ,toed in mare.....slaughter is not done HUMANELY in the slaughter houses... THATS the problem. It's all about blood,guts,terror and panic !!! Why not just just DO THE RIGHT THING and them put down by a vet in a place they have come to know as their HOME? charmedlife

[Blistering Winds]

THe problem is it COSTS. And there are people out there that can't afford that cost (sometimes because of loss of job).

The other thing is the cost to have the body burned or rendered. COST COST COST!!

It does cost a lot. 300-800 to put a horse down and have the body delt with.

AND NO YOU CANNOT BURY ALL OF THE BODIES, as here in texas, you are NOT allowed to bury a body in many counties without permits, epa standards, etc.

[Blistering Winds]

as for breeding, that is what we promote here. Is REASONABLE breeding adn attempt to head off breeding for "another horse".

[DBurr]

Originally Posted by cowgurly02

For those anti-slaughter, tell me what to do with the 50,000 + horses PER YEAR that are unwanted? Where will they go? Sorry but I don't want to see them starving, neglected and suffer a lot worse deaths than slaughter.

First off, 50,000 horses are less than 1% of the total US horse population of 7,000,000.

In the 1990's the horse slaughter industry experienced a sharp decline. Here are some stats (from the USDA's records of horses slaughtered in the US):

1990 - 345,700 horses slaughtered
1991 - 276,900 horses slaughtered (down by 68,800 from 1990)
1992 - 246,400 horses slaughtered (down by 30,500 from 1991)
1993 - 167,300 horses slaughtered (down by 79,100 from 1992)
1994 - 107,000 horses slaughtered (down by 60,300 from 1993)
1995 - 109,200 horses slaughtered (up by 2,200 from 1994)
1996 - 103,700 horses slaughtered (down by 5,500 from 1995)
1997 - 87,100 horses slaughtered (down by 16,600 from 1996)
1998 - 72,000 horses slaughtered (down by 15,100 from 1997)
1999 - 61,700 horses slaughtered (down by 10,300 from 1998)
2000 - 50,400 horses slaughtered (down by 11,300 from 1999)

Despite the rapid decline of the horse slaughter business in the first half of that decade, there were no outbreaks of horse neglect. The horses that didn't go to slaughter during that time likely went to good homes.

From 1990 to 2000 the number of horse slaughterhouses operating in the US declined. Many of them went out of business.

The number of horses slaughtered doesn't depend on how many are unwanted, it depends on the processing capacity of the plants. If we had one horse slaughterhouse operating in the US capable of processing 25,000 horses per year, its defenders would say "We had 25,000 unwanted horses in this timeframe."

[charmedlife]

Originally Posted by Blistering Winds

as for breeding, that is what we promote here. Is REASONABLE breeding adn attempt to head off breeding for "another horse".

The ranchers and farmers deal with natural cause deaths all the time. I would be willing to bet that most of them bury their livestock quietly and quickly.(legal or not) I am willing to bet the Majority of people who own horses INDEED DO have the money to have them humanely put down. charmedlife

[Blistering Winds]

Here is a question, my vet just e-mailed me and brought this up. For other reasons the "OTHER PURPOSES" are feared.

Here is the quote again

To prevent the slaughter of horses in and from the United States for human consumption by prohibiting the slaughter of horses for human consumption and by prohibiting the trade and transport of horseflesh and live horses intended for human consumption, and for other purposes.

Breaking it down....there are other fears in the AVMA community other than the trailering issues.

The fact of PUTTING the horse down is in jepardy as well. Because it is a form of "slaughter' when you kill your horse. Whether it be by bolt, electrocution, gun, or buth. And if there isn't a MEDICAL reason, this bill puts that into jeopardy. So those UNWANTED Horses will have to become very ill and unsavable for a vet to put the horse down.

That is another "clarification" that the vets want to see as well. Not just due to a medical injury, but if the owner CHOOSES their healthy horse to be put down, then they should still have that right.

(just more fears that some vets feel need to be addressed as well)


ALSO, $$ to pay for all of this????

Lets see, the US Ag budget is already stressed and emptied for the year. Between the West Nile research, Cattle, sheep, pigs, and the Farms that got nailed with hail this summer and might not yield a crop or didnt' yield a crop......

WHERE again are we going to get funding for the horses at rescues??? THIS should be the FIRST thing SET UP AND RUNNING before this bill is passed. In my opinion. THis should have all the bugs worked out, THEN we can deal with shutting down slaughter.

And as to California's claim to fame, well, I can promise you that some of those horses that are there DO end up in slaughter. The kill buyer I know (wont name names.....) has bought horses IN California and taken them to slaughter. So their "no slaughter" is just causing horses to travel further. (though the kill buyer i know does take good care of his property as he wants his money!!)

Without Slaughter, in that bill, needs to be Funds to pay vets to do humane euthanasias for FREE to the clients that cannot afford their horses to be put down. To prevent the horses from starving to death due to funds. And no room at rescues (and yes, there are MANY rescues currently full due to both land availability and funds)