Please write your Congress person, Here is a Sample Letter
Animal Angels Investigation
Animals' Angels investigators investigate the horse slaughter feedlot in Morton, Texas on March 1, 2009. The investigation revealed live horses housed in the same area of the property where the company is composting dead animals. Several dead horse carcasses could visually be seen, as well as live horses standing, eating and laying down in composting piles.
Graph courtesy of Animal Law Coalition
Horse slaughter in the U.S. ended in early 2008 adding the stats to this graph would have been missing.
The Horse Industry’s Dirty Little Secret
The results of many surveys show that Americans consistently and overwhelmingly disapprove of horse slaughter for human consumption (recent polls from Kentucky, Texas and Utah respectively show that 82, 72 and 69 percent of those questioned oppose the practice). Americans simply do not approve of horse slaughter on any level. Even those who do support it call it a “necessary evil”, implying that even they do not approve of it fully.
Horse slaughter is not a public service. It is a business operating for profit, pure and simple. The horse slaughter plants are foreign owned, operating at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. The recent Federal Income Tax return of one Texas horse slaughter plant showed the plant paid only $5 in federal taxes on $12 million in sales.
The current patchwork of state laws on horse slaughter is inadequate. Prohibited by state laws in Texas and Illinois where the only domestic horse slaughter plants operated until last year, horse slaughter could simply resume in other states that have no such laws. Recently, the South Dakota state legislature considered a bill that would have opened the door to a plant opening in that state. The measure failed, but could pass in another state or another time. Federal law prohibiting horse slaughter ensures that slaughterhouses don’t simply relocate.
The failure to enact federal law prohibiting horse slaughter, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (AHSPA), has allowed for the export of American horses to Canada and Mexico, exacerbating the brutality of already cruel transport and slaughter practices.
For those looking to do more, you should also contact your US Representative and ask him/her to cosponsor and support HR 503 and also contact Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) and ask her to ensure that the bill moves swiftly and safely through the House
Export of horses for slaughter abroad
Question:
If there is a ban on horse slaughter in the U.S., will there be an increase in the export of horses for foreign slaughter?
Answer:
The AHSPA contains clear provisions prohibiting the export of horses for slaughter abroad, as well as clear enforcement and penalty provisions. Risk of federal prosecution and the high costs associated with illegally transporting horses are strong deterrents.
Question:
Aren’t the foreign-owned plants in the U.S. a better alternative than horse slaughter plants over the border?
Answer:
Quite simply, none are acceptable. Whether inside or outside U.S. borders the commercial slaughter of horses is not euthanasia but a brutal and terrifying death. The captive bolt gun was designed for use on cattle and pigs and is not appropriate for equine. Horses are flight animals and with their long muscular neck the bolt gun is imprecise and leads to injury and/or failure to render the horse unconscious. In addition, the horse’s brain sits further back in their skull than pigs and cattle making a correct hit nearly impossible. Many horses were conscious and struggling when they were shackled and hoisted by a rear leg to have their throats cut, as seen in undercover footage from inside the horse slaughter facilities in the U.S.
Horse slaughter advocates cite the AVMA 2000 Report on Euthanasia as support for their position that horse slaughter is “humane euthanasia”. But the AVMA Report regarding horses was based on the Australian Veterinary Association Guidelines for Humane Slaughter and Euthanasia, and the conclusion that the captive bolt gun is an acceptable method of horse euthanasia is contrary to the opinion of the Australian Veterinary Association relied on by the AVMA.
The Australian Veterinary Association clearly states “the captive bolt pistol is not satisfactory for horses since firm pressure to the forehead is essential for its effective use and this tends to be resisted by the horse.” This is especially true under slaughter plant conditions where hundreds of horses per day are slaughtered.
The fact is that the horse slaughter companies and the very trade associations who support horse slaughter, claiming it performs a ‘service’ that alleviates equine suffering, are the self-same groups working strenuously for the continued brutal export of tens of thousands of America's horses for slaughter in Mexico and Canada, by physically shipping horses to slaughter and/or by actively opposing the AHSPA.
There is no question, horse slaughter is NOT humane euthanasia but terrible suffering inflicted on the way to and during slaughter, whether inside or outside U.S. borders.
Humane Euthanasia
Question:
But don’t experts say horse slaughter is human euthanasia?
Answer:
Euthanasia is a gentle painless death to prevent suffering and is intended to relieve pain. Horse slaughter inflicts pain and is in no way comparable to humane euthanasia. Horse slaughter is a death preceded by terror, pain, and suffering in which pregnant mares, foals, stallions, injured horses, and even blind horses, are transported in crowded double-decker cattle trucks without food, water, or rest. Upon arrival, their suffering intensifies many times over. It is the united opinion of VEW professionals that horse slaughter is inhumane and is not euthanasia. Recall (see preceding answer) that the Australian study which serves as the basis for the AVMA’s report calling horse slaughter by captive bolt “humane,” took the opposite view.
In fact horse slaughter violates 4 of the AVMA’s 10 standards of what is humane euthanasia such as being irreversible (according to USDA records equine can and do regain consciousness) and not traumatizing to those viewing it.
Previous Congressional Vote on Horse Slaughter
Question:
Didn't Congress already vote to stop horse slaughter when it passed the amendment to the 2006 Agriculture budget removing funding for required USDA inspections at the horsemeat plants?
Answer:
The intent of Congress was to stop horse slaughter with the passage of the Ensign Byrd Amendment, the Senate voting 68-29, the House voting 269-158 in favor. But Michael Johanns circumvented the legislation by instituting a "pay for service inspections" program for the 3 horse slaughter plants. The program was ruled illegal in the lower court and appeals court. By the time it reached the Supreme Court, state laws in Texas and Illinois had already shut down domestic slaughter. The states acted but Federal law is required to affect a true national ban.
The House overwhelmingly passed the federal ban in 2006, but the Senate failed to vote on the issue in effect killing the bill. Although the bill was reintroduced, it has not yet received a vote in either the Senate or the House.
Neglect and Abuse
Question:
Will banning horse slaughter mean more cases of horse abuse and neglect?
Answer:
No. Since closure of the domestic plants in early part 2007 there has been no rise in neglect and abuse cases. Both the Illinois Department of Agriculture and the Hooved Animal Humane Society (HAHS) reported that during the 2002-2004 closure of the only slaughter plant in the region, abuse cases actually decreased. Since California banned horse slaughter in 1998 there has been no rise in abuse and neglect and horse theft has dropped by over 84%. 2007 statistics also show that nationally abuse rates were lower than in 2006.
Texas, which had the only two slaughter plants in 2003, had among the nation’s highest rates of cruelty and theft. Data indicates that the existence and proximity of horse slaughter plants correspond to increased horse abuse and theft.
Horse slaughter, not its ban, means more cases of abuse and neglect. Horse slaughter creates an incentive for abuse and neglect by promoting irresponsible breeding practices. It provides a “dumping ground” for irresponsible breeders and a ‘throw away’ mentality generally. By treating horses as a commodity rather than a living being, it promotes a lack of compassion and empathy for horses.
While quite a number of news articles have recently been published about abuse and neglect cases, it does not in fact show an increase in abuse and neglect cases. It is simply a case of public awareness similar to that of what happened with puppy mills in the late 1990’s.
Unwanted Horses
Question:
If horses aren't slaughtered, where will all the unwanted horses go?
Answer:
The fear tactic of unwanted horses is similar to the abandoned horses fear tactic, both used to inflame and obfuscate the facts. The facts is the annual number of horses slaughtered in the U.S. dropped from over 300,000 in the 1990s to less than 66,000 in 2004, with no special infrastructure to absorb the thousands of "unwanted" horses that were not slaughtered. Horses are simply being kept longer, sold to others, humanely euthanized, or donated to retirement and rescue facilities. The "surplus horse population" is a scare tactic.
Question:
If slaughter is not an option, what will we do with sick, old and unwanted horses?
Answer:
It is not realistic to suggest that those horses going to slaughter would need to be euthanized and disposed of following passage of the AHSPA. Most horses going to slaughter are marketable animals (per USDA study showing 92.3% in good condition), thus many horses previously slaughtered would instead be kept by their owners, sold to someone else or placed at sanctuaries.
But even if they are all euthanized their bodies can either be rendered or buried. Each year approximately 920,000 horses die (10 percent of an estimated population of 9.2 million) and the majority are not slaughtered, but euthanized and rendered or buried without any negative environmental impact. Just over 100,000 horses were slaughtered in the U.S. in 2006, representing a mere 1% of the equine population-an increase that the current infrastructure can certainly sustain. Humane euthanasia and carcass disposal is highly affordable and widely available. The average cost of having a horse humanely euthanized and safely disposing of the animal's carcass is approximately $225, while the average monthly cost of keeping a horse is approximately $200.
Cost of Care a Government Burden
Question:
If there is a ban on horse slaughter, will horse rescue and retirement groups have the resources to take care of horses given up by their owners?
Answer:
Hundreds of horse rescue organizations operate around the country, and additional facilities are being established. However, most horses currently going to slaughter will not need to be absorbed into the rescue community, but are marketable horses that will be sold to new owners. A licensed veterinarian should euthanize sick and elderly horses.
Question:
Should the government have to pay for the care of horses given up by their owners?
Answer:
It is not the government's responsibility to provide for the care of horses voluntarily given up by their owners. The question is based upon the false premise that (1) horses no longer going to slaughter would have no other use, and (2) that these horses would become the financial responsibility of the federal government.
Horse owners, not the government, will remain responsible for the care of their horses. Owners who no longer wish to keep their horses and who cannot sell or place their horses in a new home will continue to have the option of humane euthanasia. The average cost for veterinarian-administered euthanasia and carcass disposal – approximately $225, the cost of one month’s care – is simply a part of responsible horse ownership.
Only sick and old horses go to slaughter
Question:
Are only the old, infirmed and no longer serviceable horses slaughtered?
Answer:
Horse slaughter advocates want you to believe that this is a ‘service,’ that horses being slaughtered are lame, old or ill tempered. Yet the USDA funded Temple Grandin study of horses arriving at slaughter found that well over 90% (92.3%) met none of these criteria. In fact, the slaughter of healthy horses means greater profitability for the slaughter plant owners
In testimony in front of the US House Commerce Committee, slaughter plant representatives stated that the horses most commonly slaughtered are young and healthy as they provide the best quality meat.
‘Kill buyer’ misrepresentation
Question:
Are horse owners told when their horse is being bought for slaughter?
Answer:
The anti-slaughter movement has its roots in the horse owning and racing community and has no agenda beyond the protection of our horses. American horses are not raised for meat and it is a violation of our cultural values to allow their slaughter.
Economic Impact
Question:
What is next, cows?
Answer:
The anti-slaughter movement has its roots in the horse owning and racing community and has no agenda beyond the protection of our horses. American horses are not raised for meat and it is a violation of our cultural values to allow their slaughter.
Economic Impact
Question:
How will banning slaughter affect the economy?
Answer:
The three slaughter plants closed last year were foreign owned, and paid no corporate taxes or export tariffs. The entire Horse meat ‘industry’ was only 0.001% the size of the U.S. meat industry, making it economically insignificant.
Private property rights
Question:
Does a horse slaughter ban affect people’s property rights?
Answer:
The property rights of horse owners are not dependent upon the operation of the 3 U.S. slaughter plants (recently closed).
Horse owners’ property rights become an issue when they cannot sell their horses without any assurance they will not end up at slaughter. Owners regularly unknowingly send their horses to slaughter.
Horse owners’ property rights become an issue when their horses are stolen out of pastures and barns every year for the horsemeat trade. Ohio newspapers reported the theft of two prized former racehorses that were sold to a killer buyer employed by one of the three foreign-owned horse slaughterhouses. Sky Dutcher, another victim, came to Washington, D.C. to tell the story of how her horse was stolen from his corral on her 12th birthday and sent to slaughter within two days. As already sited, horse theft has dropped drastically in California in the years following the ban.
During the time the 3 slaughter plants were operating in the United States we have been unable to find a single instance of law enforcement recovering a stolen horse at the slaughter plants. However, owners and their agents have recovered stolen horses or have realized their horse’s fate at the plants. With horses now going into Mexico and Canada, it limits the ability of law enforcement and owners to recover stolen horses. It also increases the cost of recovery for owners, if they did in fact recover their stolen property at one of the slaughter plants in Mexico and Canada, for legal fees and transporting their stolen horses home.
Further, private property rights do not grant owners the unfettered right to abuse their animals. Every state has anti-cruelty laws that mandate protections for animals. Michael Vick would love to claim that his private property rights protect him from an indictment for dog fighting, but that is clearly not a justification for harming animals. Owners will still have ample legal options of reselling, donating, or euthanizing their horse (costs approx $225 – the amount of one month’s keep for a horse).
Standards of care at sanctuaries and rescue organizations
Question:
Is it true no standards exist for horse rescue facilities that take unwanted horses?
Answer:
The Animal Welfare Institute and Doris Day Animal League published "Basic Guidelines for Operating an Equine Rescue or Retirement Facility" in 2004. These and other materials are being incorporated into an expanded sanctuary accreditation program via the Homes for Horses Coalition (www.homesforhorses.org). Additionally, The Association of Sanctuaries and the American Sanctuaries Association provide accreditation programs, a code of ethics and guidelines for the operation of sanctuaries and rescue organizations. Horse rescue groups must also provide for the welfare of horses in their custody in compliance with state and local animal welfare laws.
