[Super Step]

I do agree that the same questions are be asked when the slaughter subject comes up. They were ignored the previous times they were asked. They will be asked again and again until they are answered.
Once answered, then a solution has been created.
Our government is paying a fortune to care for the excess BLM horses culled from the herds. I doubt they will assume responsibility for the huge influx of unwanted horses under private ownership at this time.
Most Americans will not budget monthly donations for local rescue operations. I doubt they would be willing to support a tax increase to care for these additional horses.
These horses will not evaporate and go away if slaughter is ended.
Yes the question of what will happen to them will be asked again and again. It should be.

[arabgirl15]

This was to BW, not me, but I will add.

Because she has the right (kay maybe not right but you get what I mean) on here just as anyone else.

You can post in any thread as long as your post is within the rules, and in the certain forums (ie, adults cant post in kids and vice versa).

Originally Posted by pocahontas

Blistering Winds

Why do you show up in so many threads here on this Forum
AND
Why does it almost always end up with you talking about you?

[Blistering Winds]

Yes, this is an election year in many areas. So is next year. Many reps are coming to close on their terms and are up for re-election.

This bill has been stalled in several committees, the committees where this bill BELONGS. However, because they cannot get it past with facts, they are now playing on emotions, the "good buddy" system, and on ignorant congress men and women and stuffed it here.

Committee/Subcommittee:Activity:House Energy and Commerce Referral, In Committee Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer ProtectionReferral



This is not where this bill belongs. They are counting on ignorance and emotions to send this to the floor.

The committee that this is in is not even infront of agricultural people. It is in with furnature, automobiles, and trade embargos. NOT people who have ANY idea on how, what, and where a horse lives and needs.

They are No better than people who stuff riders on bills to get things passed.


There are already laws in place in the Horse Protection act....but they are using the "soring" issues to grab at straws and "RIDE" The slaughter end in.

"SHADY" business in my opinion. And if this is how you want things done. So be it. Just honestly, don't complain when "Shady" business occurs elsewhere in legislature.

I don't want someone who knows nothing to tell me I cannot send my horse to the rendering company. (Different than slaughter). That bill is going to limit my right to do that.

Horses will die. over 90000 were killed last year? WOW, that was MORE Than the estimate made in the Spring of 05'. And that number is on the increase!

Why? because of economy.

Why am I still talking? because people will read and be able to form an educated opinion on it because they will see the BIG picture. Not everyone knows the big picture. Not everyone can see beyond what the government hands out to us or the "animal RIGHTS activists" hand to us.

Animal welfare is involved. Yes.


Horses will still die. They will be euthanized or shot to death at home. And more will be SHOT to death than the vet called out. At least the slaughter house is more humane than some of the idiots that will attempt to shoot their horse when they cannot afford to pay for euthanization.

But then, there is another bill out, hanging around, that wants to limit our ability and right to do that as well. I'll find it, but it draws out WHEN and WHY you can attempt to shoot your horse. And "financial difficulties with no help" sure isn't on there.

Rescues are charging people to take on donations. If you can't afford to euthanize them (at a rediculously low average to euthanize AND dispose of...225? Where they pull that average out of?) you sure as heck can't afford to send them to a rescue, where the donation fees run about the same as that 225 number. (300 from one major organization to turn your horse over).

OR, you can just neglect the horse, and they'll take the horse for free...but then, you are up on neglect charges.

can't turn the horse loose....neglect and inhumane charges.

Did you know, the city of San Francisco, you do not own a cat or dog? you are their guardians. Just like your child. They can assign a lawyer with your tax dollars for a dog or cat......and soon...horse, cow, pig, sheep, goat...

So, if you are a horse guardian....an dthey are equal to humans...you cannot euthanize humans....so will that become a choice removed from us? God knows my grandmother wanted to be put out of her misery when she was dying a very painful, long death. We couldn't even pull the plug from the wall because of stupid doctors and red tape.







What is my choice? Find a cure for 100,000 horses not having homes every year. Limit breeding, I'm personally all for the national ID plan with horses...because then, you really DO have to have the finances to have a horse. We can prosecute people that neglect their horses easier, and use those funds to help the cause of homeless horses.

I feel that "unwanted" is not the right term. Homeless is more like it.


Government cannot pay for our own homeless, our own children (even before the war).

How can we fund what....2005 = 90000 horses?

We don't have enough hay to feed the few hundred in the pan handle....how on earth are we going to continue to feed horses that would have been put down the year before?

Horses will die. A LOT in the next few years when they close the doors.

HOW they die and the way they are disposed of is up to .......oh yeah...no one has figured that into the equation......

[pocahontas]

Blistering Winds

I do not have a "deadly vendetta" against you as you say that I do.

I think twice and am apprehensive to post a thread or have input on someone else's thread, because from what I see, you post over and over and over in a thread. And seem to want the attention in so many threads.

It gets suffocating.

I like to hear what you have to say, but....I turn it off, cause it is so much.

[pocahontas]

Trying to get this thread off of the Humane Society Band Wagon.

Here are other people, orgs, and rescues talking about and asking for the bill to pass.
http://www.wildhorserescue.org/index.htm
http://www.wildhorserescue.org/bands.htm

http://www.api4animals.org/legislation?p=193&more=1

http://www.habitatforhorses.org/join...gns/ahspa.html

http://www.manesandtailsorganization...ng_legends.htm

[pocahontas]

Originally Posted by Super Step

IOur government is paying a fortune to care for the excess BLM horses culled from the herds. I doubt they will assume responsibility for the huge influx of unwanted horses under private ownership at this time.

Ran accross this
http://www.manesandtailsorganization...ng_legends.htm

In reality, the wild horses and burros are not the problem, rather it is the privately owned livestock grazing on public lands subsidized by American taxpayers at great expense. It is important to note that cattle are ‘static’ animals in that they do not move much and they destroy the ground. It takes ten years to reclaim land destroyed by cattle, and longer in arid areas such as Nevada. The cattle grazing on public lands are ‘anecdotal’ to the beef industry as they comprise a mere 2.5% of the total beef consumption in the United States. Why is this allowed? Perhaps the land leases in Nevada - at least - should be nullified.


Paul Rogers of the 'San Jose Mercury News ("Cash Cows" page 2S, column 2 Nov. 7, 1999)' (Original source: Forest Guardians) performed nine months of research that included studying 26,000 leases. Mr. Rogers’ research revealed that 10% of the total grazing leases are held by lessees that control 65% of the total public land. Furthermore, these lessees include billionaire ranchers and corporations such as Ted Turner, Baron Hilton, Mary Hewlett-Jaffey, JR Simplot, Annheiser-Busch, and the Hunt Oil Company of Dallas. The Public Lands Ranching Organization reports that the federal grazing program operates at a loss, costing taxpayers at least $500,000,000 annually. This figure includes direct program costs and millions of dollars spent on emergency feed, drought and flood relief, and predator control to support or mitigate damage from public lands grazing.

[Blistering Winds]

Originally Posted by pocahontas

Blistering Winds

I do not have a "deadly vendetta" against you as you say that I do.

I think twice and am apprehensive to post a thread or have input on someone else's thread, because from what I see, you post over and over and over in a thread. And seem to want the attention in so many threads.

It gets suffocating.

I like to hear what you have to say, but....I turn it off, cause it is so much.

Whatever your issues, please PM me so we can keep any thread posted, regardless who the OP is, on topic. The only reason you should be apprehensive about posting is if you post abusive or highly questionable stuff.

Just because I post, doesn't mean your technique or way of doing things isn't as relevant...as there are many ways of doing things. I've learned a lot from others that post....have gone in to great depth with some, getting down to the nitty gritty....of how and why to do things....and have even incorporated some into my own life.

So, unless your ways are down right abusive and rediculous...you should not feel threatened to pop in your 2 cents. Everyone else seems to be able to. I cannot control your self esteem issues. Sorry. I have taken years to get mine to the point where I can state my opinion...face to face and on the computer. I'm not going to go "SHY" just because someone else has issues.

[Blistering Winds]

Originally Posted by pocahontas

Ran accross this
http://www.manesandtailsorganization...ng_legends.htm

In reality, the wild horses and burros are not the problem, rather it is the privately owned livestock grazing on public lands subsidized by American taxpayers at great expense. It is important to note that cattle are ‘static’ animals in that they do not move much and they destroy the ground. It takes ten years to reclaim land destroyed by cattle, and longer in arid areas such as Nevada. The cattle grazing on public lands are ‘anecdotal’ to the beef industry as they comprise a mere 2.5% of the total beef consumption in the United States. Why is this allowed? Perhaps the land leases in Nevada - at least - should be nullified.


Paul Rogers of the 'San Jose Mercury News ("Cash Cows" page 2S, column 2 Nov. 7, 1999)' (Original source: Forest Guardians) performed nine months of research that included studying 26,000 leases. Mr. Rogers’ research revealed that 10% of the total grazing leases are held by lessees that control 65% of the total public land. Furthermore, these lessees include billionaire ranchers and corporations such as Ted Turner, Baron Hilton, Mary Hewlett-Jaffey, JR Simplot, Annheiser-Busch, and the Hunt Oil Company of Dallas. The Public Lands Ranching Organization reports that the federal grazing program operates at a loss, costing taxpayers at least $500,000,000 annually. This figure includes direct program costs and millions of dollars spent on emergency feed, drought and flood relief, and predator control to support or mitigate damage from public lands grazing.

I want to ask a few things on this. Since you brought it up (regardless WHO posted..)

Cattle graze that land. People, including the Humane Society of America, are trying to stop feed lot cattle. Yet, people want to take away the grazing land from the cattle.

Cattle feed people, horses don't...well, we want to stop them being fed overseas at least..... So.......who should get the right away?

[pocahontas]

Originally Posted by Blistering Winds

I want to ask a few things on this. Since you brought it up (regardless WHO posted..)

Cattle graze that land. People, including the Humane Society of America, are trying to stop feed lot cattle. Yet, people want to take away the grazing land from the cattle.

Cattle feed people, horses don't...well, we want to stop them being fed overseas at least..... So.......who should get the right away?

Your way off track..
Do read what I was replying to. It isn't regardless.
It has a meaning in regards to a previous post I was replying to.
Nothing to what you are saying here.

[pocahontas]

I knew I shouldn't of posted this thread.

Makes me sick and disheartened.

There are those who want to argue, and I just found myself falling for it again. And those who have to have their noses everywhere. Makes it tough. Not just makng a post, but overkill!!

Hmmm..pecking order in humans isn't much different then in horses