National Call-In Day for Horses: Sept. 6

[PaceAdvantage]

Sorry I didn't see this sooner:

We need your help to light up the phones on Capitol Hill. Call your U.S. Representative on Wednesday, Sept. 6 and show your support for American horses. Our opponents are vigorously lobbying to keep the horse slaughter industry alive and well. We must send a clear message that Americans do not want our horses butchered and shipped overseas. You can reach your Representative through the Congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 or click here (http://community.hsus.org/humane/leg-lookup/search.html) to look up his or her phone number. All you need to say is:
"I am a constituent and I am calling to ask that the Representative please protect American horses from slaughter and support H.R. 503, the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. I am very concerned about American horses and I don't want them slaughtered."

Your calls will not only make a difference, they will help make history.

http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/citizen_lobbyist_center/national_day_horses.html

[kenwoodallpromos]

Done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DJofSD]

Newly elected Rep. Brian Bilbrary is going to support the prevention of slaughtering of horses.

[Suff]

Sorry I didn't see this sooner:



http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/citizen_lobbyist_center/national_day_horses.html

I called Capuano's office today Mike because I know this is important to you and yours.

Here's his contact info for any other folks in my district. I urged him to support the amendment.
Washington, D.C. Office

Phone
(202) 225-5111

Fax
(202) 225-9322

Mailing Address
Office of Congressman Michael E. Capuano
1530 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515


The way I understand it, this bill, HR 503 is a redo of HR 857, the 2004 bill, that did not pass. It will amend the Horse Protection Act to prevent only the slaughter of horses for Human Consumption. Realistically, getting a bill passed that eliminates horse slaughter for any purpose is not doable.

This bill simply amends an already in place law, to include , the sale, shipping, and/or participating in any actions that result in Horse slaughter for Human Consumption.

America's a big country and livestock handling is not an easy place for common ground. Opinions vary on a law preventing any slaughter at all. I think an adjustment in the bill to include Slaughter for Human Consumption is about the biggest victory you could reasonably expect.

[Stevie Belmont]

I sent and called Sen Mendez of NJ. Also sent an email to Dick Codey.

Frank Luatenberg is the co sponsor of the bill I found out today. Sent him an email too. So NJ will do it's part on that note. I hope it passes.

I'm against this big time.

[Murph]

What happened to the policy of seperating horseracing discussion from political discussion? This message is SO political it gives me a headache. Should not property rights remain with the owner of the property in every case? Our grandfathers would say YES, absolutely.

This issue concerns the production of livestock for food. It has NOTHING to do with horseracing and everything to do with one group of people having the power to decide what is best for another groups' business matters.

Shock topics are designed to divert our attention from more serious issues that should merit our uppermost consideration, such as the world war we are standiing at the brink of, or the impending bankruptcy of our national treasury.

I had come to depend on the seperation of politics from the racing forums here. I'm disappointed to find that the forum policy is so flexible as to be changed on a whim without any warning.

I call "foul" on this one, Mike.

Murph

[PaceAdvantage]

It has NOTHING to do with horseracing....

Tell that to Exceller and Ferdinand.

In addition, political discussions RELATED to horse racing are always welcome on the horse racing side....witness the recent discussion on the Internet gambling bill, where to the best of my recollection, I don't recall you raising an objection....

Now, you raising all those other subjects in your post (war, economy, etc.) would be worthy of deletion, since they are politically bent, and REALLY have NOTHING to do with horse racing.

[DJofSD]

I was told once (in my 'yout') that any time there is more than 2 people in a room/discussion there's an element of politics involved.

So, to that end, what we're seeing debated here is the amount of politics involved in the thread.

Granted, this thread is purely political. But you can't make an omelet w/o breaking some eggs.

[Murph]

Exceller and Ferdinand were not claimed off the track for use as commercial meat. Their owners decided how to dispose of their stock as each owner has every right.

You've made a call for political action that will prevent an owner of property from excercising his rights to decide the best use of said property. How does this relate to horseracing?

It is certainly sad that Exceller met his unfortunate fate. Exceller had no say in the matter and neither should anyone else, aside from the owner of the stock.

DELETE AS YOU SEE FIT!

Murph

[Tom]

What happened to the policy of seperating horseracing discussion from political discussion? This message is SO political it gives me a headache. Should not property rights remain with the owner of the property in every case? Our grandfathers would say YES, absolutely.

This issue concerns the production of livestock for food. It has NOTHING to do with horseracing and everything to do with one group of people having the power to decide what is best for another groups' business matters.

Shock topics are designed to divert our attention from more serious issues that should merit our uppermost consideration, such as the world war we are standiing at the brink of, or the impending bankruptcy of our national treasury.

I had come to depend on the seperation of politics from the racing forums here. I'm disappointed to find that the forum policy is so flexible as to be changed on a whim without any warning.

I call "foul" on this one, Mike.

Murph

Your compassion underwhelms me. I hope I never need to count on YOU for anything. Where were your complaints on Barbaro's condition? After, all all that money wasted on a horse - you should be screaming bloody murder.

Having a heart for the beautiful animals who give thier all for our enjoyment is politics? Give me a friggnin break. :mad::ThmbDown::ThmbDown::ThmbDown:


And I deleted your website from my favorites - I'm boycotting you.

[PaceAdvantage]

Their owners decided how to dispose of their stock as each owner has every right.

And you are 100% correct.

Thankfully, I also have a right to promote a way in which we can LEGALLY make owner's options either extremely limited, or nil, when it comes to slaughtering their racehorses (or any horse for that matter) in the United States.

Call me a hypocrite, call me what you will. In fact, I will even let you know that I am a meat eater. I love my hamburgers and steaks, my chicken and my fish, etc.

But when it comes to horses, I want to make it as difficult as possible for owners to arrive at that slaughter option. If you replace the word horse, with the word dog or cat, you'll probably understand where I am coming from. Of course, I've had this same debate on this board in the past (in the horse racing section no less), so I know what's coming next....I think....

[xtb]

What happened to the policy of seperating horseracing discussion from political discussion? This message is SO political it gives me a headache. Should not property rights remain with the owner of the property in every case? Our grandfathers would say YES, absolutely.

This issue concerns the production of livestock for food. It has NOTHING to do with horseracing and everything to do with one group of people having the power to decide what is best for another groups' business matters.

Shock topics are designed to divert our attention from more serious issues that should merit our uppermost consideration, such as the world war we are standiing at the brink of, or the impending bankruptcy of our national treasury.

I had come to depend on the seperation of politics from the racing forums here. I'm disappointed to find that the forum policy is so flexible as to be changed on a whim without any warning.

I call "foul" on this one, Mike.

Murph

:ThmbDown::ThmbDown::ThmbDown:

[Murph]

Call me a hypocrite, call me what you will.

I'm not calling anyone by any names (or questioning their compassion for that matter). You prove frequently that you are the boss here and you operate the forums carte blanc. You have every right. My mistake lies in questioning the decision maker I suppose.

It's obvious that you have strong feelings on the horse slaughter issue. I have strong feelings about the continuous political usurping of personal property rights in this country.

Murph

[DJofSD]

PA -- a request for the next enhancement to the BBS S/W.

It's probably a difficult thing to implement, but what the hell, you don't ask you don't get.

If I have some one in my ignore list, don't even send me the email notification from them for any posting to a thread I've subscribed to.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Horseracing or political? I understand the % of equine slaughtered in the Us and Mexico is not a great % of the market, but the wealth of those in horseracing is stubstantial and I'm sure many who have Thoroughbred farms also have some other breeds.
More political is Bish allowing non-USDA inspectors to keep the equine slaughter industry in the USA afloat.

[PaceAdvantage]

You have every right. My mistake lies in questioning the decision maker I suppose.

It's obvious that you have strong feelings on the horse slaughter issue. I have strong feelings about the continuous political usurping of personal property rights in this country.

Hey, you have every right to question me. I have no problem with anyone questioning anything I do, as long as it is rational. You sir, are rational.

Now, if I replace the word horse, with the word dog and/or cat, would you still feel as strongly about personal property rights? Do you feel that an owner of a Dog or Cat should be able to carve them up and send them to whatever country it is that serves Dog and/or Cat as a delicacy?

And yes, I have heard the "people keep pigs as pets" argument, so I am a hypocrite for not including pigs in on my list, in addition to dogs and cats. The only problem with that debate is that pigs are RAISED as a food source in this country. Dogs and cats and HORSES are NOT.

[PaceAdvantage]

rrpic6's now deleted post is precisely the reason why politically motivated discussions NOT RELATED to horse racing (along with politcally motivated avatars) are not allowed in this area of the board.

I think most would agree that this particular "politically motivated" discussion IS related to horse racing in a very graphic way....

[bigmack]

I have strong feelings about the continuous political usurping of personal property rights in this country.

Is this really a well defined example of “big brother” heavily raining down on ones personal property rights? Come on – it’s an issue of humanity and the right thing to do. Getting bent that the thread has seamed the political world with horseracing is silly. There have been many issues about legislative decisions that affect this game that have occupied numerous threads without issue from anyone. Lighten up Murph

Back to the thread - MAKE THAT CALL

[Maverick58034]

Because you know, in America, we lack basic rights that other countries have...

I mean, its not like you can burn a flag, stage a protest or speak freely in a public forum.....

Oh wait, you can.


My family has owned horses for generations, and they are like members of the family to us. None of them race -- but we really don't care. My dog doesnt race either -- I guess I should have him taken away tomorrow morning. I mean, he is MY DOG, so I can do whatever I want with him, right? I think I could expect a visit from the ASPCA with this mentality...

[bigmack]

The House vote was 263-146 to outlaw the killing of horses for human consumption

146 against it?

[Observer]

The USDA opposed the passing of the bill.

USDA Against Slaughter Ban (http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/todaysnews/newsview.asp?recno=66328&subsec=1)

Then there are groups who say horses who would have gone to slaughter will just end up being neglected. Well, neglect sadly happens anyway:

Starvation @ Diamond Legends - Including Wild Syn! (http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/todaysnews/newsview.asp?recno=66338&subsec=6)

If you take away an easy out for horse owners, suddenly other options will receive more attention. Maybe a little more time will be taken in placement of horses when it's time for the horse to make a career change. The point is, it's time to make horse owners stand up and take notice. If they're going to take on the responsibility, they need to see it through, and not just disgard these beautiful, majestic, living, breathing creatures like trash.

As for the point that our government has better things to be worrying about than receiving a bunch of phone calls supporting the passage of HR503 .. well, someone decided TODAY was the day for the vote, so obviously a national call-in date yesterday is not so out of line.

ANY animal not specifically bred and raised to be a food source should NOT then be slaughtered out of convenience simply because that's what the owner (or some middle person) has chosen as a way out. It's just flat-out wrong.

[Murph]

The USDA opposed the passing of the bill.

If you take away an easy out for horse owners, suddenly other options will receive more attention.The other options will more easily be legislated out of existence with the passing of this bill. Owners of property should not be subject to the whims of legislators who have more concern with their popularity ratings than the rights of Americans to decide the best use of their own property. It makes NO difference which property is in question until legislators decide the best use for the rightful owners.

ANY animal not specifically bred and raised to be a food source should NOT then be slaughtered out of convenience simply because that's what the owner (or some middle person) has chosen as a way out. It's just flat-out wrong.If an owner chooses to consider his livestock (property) as pets or investments it should remain as the owners choice. Legislation to limit property rights is leading our nation to a socialist society that many respondents are not concerned with or may even prefer. If this legislation is indeed the will of the people then it is only an example of how far the American Dream of individual rights, as granted to us by the founders, has fallen in esteem.

I would only ask that readers consider this point each time they support any laws which are designed to infringe on our individual rights as Americans. I am shocked to find that I am in the minority regarding this issue.

Murph

[DJofSD]

If an owner chooses to consider his livestock (property) as pets or investments it should remain as the owners choice. Legislation to limit property rights is leading our nation to a socialist society that many respondents are not concerned with or may even prefer. If this legislation is indeed the will of the people then it is only an example of how far the American Dream of individual rights, as granted to us by the founders, has fallen in esteem.


Insert the word "slaves" and you sound like a Southern in the 1850's.

[bigmack]

I am shocked to find that I am in the minority regarding this issue.
Murph – While your Libertarianism is duly noted, don’t you think it’s a bit misdirected in this case? I suspect that in sub rosa anyone could do as they please with their animal. Positioning this legislation as “leading our nation to a socialist society” is a stretch longer than Belmonts.

[Murph]

Insert the word "slaves" and you sound like a Southern in the 1850's.Human beings are not livestock. You will need to make this distinction when you consider my argument. It is similar to the "pets" argument. The owner chooses the level of elevation for his property. It is not for you (or anyone else) to decide this standing for them with legislation.

Try that iggy button again DJ.

Murph

[Murph]

Murph – While your Libertarianism is duly noted, don’t you think it’s a bit misdirected in this case? I suspect that in sub rosa anyone could do as they please with their animal. Positioning this legislation as “leading our nation to a socialist society” is a stretch longer than Belmonts.
They told us in the 70's that they only wanted to "ban" smoking on airplanes.
Look to where this bit of legislation has led us. I either have a choice OR I do not have a choice.

Where does it end?

Murph

[Ponyplayr]

Every two seconds a child dies of starvation. Forty thousand die every day.

It is estimated that 60,000,000 people will die of starvation this year alone.
And we don't want to slaughter a horse for human consumption?

How about allowing the slaughtering of horses for food as long as the meat is given to charities for distribution to the needy. We could give a Tax break to the owners... Food for thought.

[DJofSD]

consider my argument

Well, as I understand it, your argument is that property rights exceed all other rights. I disagree.

While ownership and rights to personal property (a man's home) are the basis for law in the western hemisphere, they are not superior to all other rights.

Here's a strained example: it's my gun, they're my bullets, you're on my land therefore if I shot you dead, that's OK because how I choose to exercise my rights with my gun on my land exceeds your rights to live.

BTW, you are not on my ignore list.

[Show Me the Wire]

Very strained example. It is immoral to kill a human being it is not immoral to kill an animal. You can not use property rights using chattel to cause harm or injury to another or another's chattle.

If it is my animal, my chattel, I have an absolute right to dispose of my property in a humane way, as torture or cruelty to animals is immoral as well.

[Observer]

Horse slaughter is humane??? WOW.

Slaughter Myths (http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/equine_protection/horse_slaughter_common_myths.html)

Warning!! Graphic Video (http://www.hsus.org/video_clips/stable_to_slaughter.html)

[Show Me the Wire]

Observer,

We went down this road before. A horse is a commodity and as a living being it should be treated in a humane way. I see no difference in slaughtering pigs, chickens, cows, etc. which are commodities too.

Using your reasoning it should be illegal to put your pet dog, cat, etc. down.

[Tom]

There is a hell of a diffeence between putting a pet down at the vet's and slaughtering a horse.

Torturing animals is a major trait amoung serial killers. Sounds like we have few buddingones here. Lack of basic humaniutarianism is telling about someone.

[PaceAdvantage]

A horse is a commodity and as a living being it should be treated in a humane way. I see no difference in slaughtering pigs, chickens, cows, etc. which are commodities too.

How can you not see a difference when the animals you mention are raised primarily as food sources for humans in the U.S.A.??? Horses are not.

You can trade pork bellies, lean hogs, live cattle, and feeder cattle at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, but you can't trade horses....

[highnote]

Morality aside -- there is no way I'd eat a race horse -- especially if it came from a trainer with an abnormally high win rate. Imagine the drugs you'd be consuming.

Now in France they raise some kind of fat little horse for food. They barely look like a horse. Maybe that's different?

But eating a thoroughbred -- no way.

Murph,
I hear what you're saying. I can see your logic. But it's hard for me to get past my own prejudice.

The one thing I can say is that at least the horses being sold for meat are at least serving some purpose -- however small.

What really bothers me is the killing of greyhounds that are no longer productive on the track.

The other thing that really bothers me is the way large chicken breeding operations dispose of newly hatched chicks when they are deformed. They are removed from the incubator and thrown live into a large garbage can. When it is filled up with baby chicks, the liner is removed and thrown into a dumpster.

I don't care if it's a horse or dog or a chicken. It should be put to death humanely.

[Indulto]

If there is an answer to this dilemma, it is not in determining the issue’s legality or morality, and it is certainly not a case of “better living through” legislation.

What bothers me about this discussion is that it appears that some would elevate the value of animal life above that of human life. If I am ever in a position to become a thoroughbred owner, I hope I would see to it that my horse is treated humanely both during and after it’s useful racing life, but the fact that racing a horse exposes it to possible if not probable pain and discomfort, physical injury (investment devaluation), and abuse resulting from human ignorance, misjudgment, and/or greed suggests implicit acceptance that a horses’ life is not as sacred as a human life.

One can only encourage race horse owners who have been treated to some measure of success and/or enjoyment through risks to and/or sacrifices by their living property, show their appreciation when circumstances are no longer mutually beneficial, but frankly, I would rather see such largesse directed toward injured jockeys and improving the physical and mental well-being of backstretch workers.

As much as I empathize with Observer and SJ, I have to agree with Murph and (gasp) SMTW on this one. Hardly a matter suitable for consumption by legislators. ;)

[highnote]

Indy,

I agree with one point. If horses were really respected they would not be raced. They are raced because of ego or selfishness. They are bet on because of ego or selfishness.

Some people bet them because they feel they are smart when they pick a winner. Some people bet them for entertainment. People place their selfsih desire for entertainment over the well being of the horse.

One thing is certain -- horses have a greater chance of a fatal injury while racing than when standing in a pasture. If we truly care about horses then we would do everything possible to minimize fatalities. Racing does not minimize a horse's chance of death.

In fact, racing increases their chance of death in other ways rather than fatal injury. Just by breeding so many race horses the chance of an unwanted horse being sold to the killer man is increased.

So perhaps it would be best to release all horses into the wild and let nature run her course. Some horses would die of starvation, or cold or predators, etc.

On the other hand, if we could take some of those wild horses and domestic them and somehow make them an economic asset then there would be incentive for people to keep and own them. And even if a few die at the hand of the killer man, surely they are better off than unprotected in the wild. And maybe, if the economics are productive enough, there will be a surplus of money that will allow people to keep their unwanted stock.

Some people do like to eat horse meat. Who am I to tell them they are wrong? Just because it is not my custom does that mean they are wrong?

Lewis and Clark ate dog meat on their epic voyage. Clark said he could eat it regularly -- and he had a pet dog that accompanied him on the trip!

In India the cow is sacred. There must not be much of a beef industry there. And if there was an attempt to start one for the purposes of exporting beef I'm sure there would be great outcry against the practice.

So maybe the same should hold here. We like horses and in general we don't eat them. So we should not export them to countries that do. Let those countries raise their own horses or buy them from other countries that raise them for food.

So I guess this is my conclusion. U.S. horses should not be sold overseas for human consumption. However, if I want to eat my own horse then it is my right to do so, but I should not sell my horse overseas to be eaten.

:confused:

[Show Me the Wire]

How can you not see a difference when the animals you mention are raised primarily as food sources for humans in the U.S.A.??? Horses are not.

You can trade pork bellies, lean hogs, live cattle, and feeder cattle at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, but you can't trade horses....

PA:

Not to be a wise ____, but horses are traded and bought everyday at race tracks and throughout the industry. Claiming races are for buying and selling commodities, race horses.

Once the useful life of the commodity is over from racing other byproducts can be made from the animals, such as food for dogs and people. Nothing is immoral about it. It may offend some peoples' sensibilities, but that is life.

Unless there is some religious reason (sacred animal and we know that is not possible in the U.S. separation of church and state), horses, as animals, have no right to have a higher standard of care applied to them, than other animals have applied to them.

[Maverick58034]

I guess once the "useful life" of my cat is done, I can make a byproduct out of it. Don't worry kids, Felix doesn't like to chase the ball of yarn anymore, but we're having a special treat for dinner!

[highnote]

Cat: The other white meat.

[Show Me the Wire]

I guess once the "useful life" of my cat is done, I can make a byproduct out of it. Don't worry kids, Felix doesn't like to chase the ball of yarn anymore, but we're having a special treat for dinner!

Your cat is not a coomodity for investment is it? More than likely your cat is a luxury irem for your personal pleasure. When does the usefull life of your personal pleasure end for your pet?

For race horses it ends when they can no longer compete and pay their way as an investment. Sort of like dairy cows. They are raised for milk and milk by products. When their useful productivity ends, they are sent to slaughter for byproduct, food. Maybe we shouldn't eat meat from old dairy caows too?

Pets and animals used for income are two separate and distinct issues regarding usefull life.

[DJofSD]

swetyejohn, with all due respect, aspects of your post leads me to conclude you've never owned any kind of horse, let alone competed one and have not been around horses or facilities/farms with horses.

[PaceAdvantage]

Once the useful life of the commodity is over from racing other byproducts can be made from the animals, such as food for dogs and people. Nothing is immoral about it. It may offend some peoples' sensibilities, but that is life.

OK, cool. When I open up my cat and dog slaughterhouse so that I can export the fur and the meat to countries like China, Korea and Vietnam, you'll be OK with that, right?

In life, there is always a line to be drawn. People in support of this bill are trying to make sure that line is in the correct place.

In the United States, horses are on a totally different plain of existence than the other commodities you equate them with, such as cows and pigs. Forget for a minute that we don't raise horses for human consumption in the USA (thus, why should they be slaughtered for food)? Let's just take a quick cultural glance at the horse, compared to other animals....

How many movies have been made about pigs? I can think of one...maybe two. How many have been made about horses?

How many works of art have had horses as part of their theme? Compare that to the amount of art based around pigs or cows.

Horses played a vital role in the development of the United States, as we all know. Transportation, agriculture, recreation, etc. None of this history includes the consumption of horse meat from animals deemed useless.

Why then, in a country that has NEVER looked to the horse as a means of sustenance, do we allow the slaughter of horses for food? So that other countries that do eat horse meat can continue with their traditions?

The sad, and honest answer is that it all comes down to, once again, the $.

[highnote]

Horses played a vital role in the development of the United States, as we all know. Transportation, agriculture, recreation, etc. None of this history includes the consumption of horse meat from animals deemed useless.

That's not true. Lewis and Clark at horse meat. In fact, it was part of their plan to eat the horses.

[highnote]

swetyejohn, with all due respect, aspects of your post leads me to conclude you've never owned any kind of horse, let alone competed one and have not been around horses or facilities/farms with horses.

Thank you. But which aspect of my post lead you to your conclusion.

I only ask because you are wrong on every part of it.

I've owned race horses. I've ridden horses since I was an infant -- I would sit on my father's lap. And I spent many summers on my grandfather's farm in Indiana. He had lots of hogs, cattle and chicken and he'd always rent a pony for us while we were there. My mother often told us about the plow horse they used before they got a tractor. It was a pet. I doubt they ate it when it died.

I watched my grandfather shoot a hog in the head with a .22 rifle then slit it's throat. And then butcher it. I'll never forget the sight of all the blood running down the barnyard slope. And the hog laying their shaking. But that was life on the farm.

Also when I visited the farm I cut off chicken's heads and plucked them for dinner. I shot a rabbit one time and cleaned it and we had it for dinner. My grandfather always kept a fish trap in his stream. We'd pull it up and it would be filled with dozens of catfish and bluegills. We'd spend the afternoon cutting their heads off and scaling them. Except with catfish, we'd drive a nail through their head and then pull their skin off with plyers -- since they don't have scales. It was never pleasant. I would never go fishing again if it means having to cut off their heads from their squirming bodies. It's a quick way to kill them, but not enjoyable. However, I'm glad I know how to clean an animal for food.

Maybe my experiences on the farm toughened me up to some extent. Or maybe they softened me up? As I said, I don't hunt or fish. Killing things does not interest me. However, being around my grandfather's livestock also taught me how to not get attached to them.

But I'll admit it's hard not to get attached to a horse, or a dog or a cat. And maybe even rabbit. Hell, I felt bad when my kid's goldfish died.

However, not everyone shares my beliefs. And I don't expect everyone to share mine. So I try to be open minded and see both sides. I've read good arguments for both sides -- and some not so good arguments for both sides.

But I respect a person's beliefs if they seem reasonable. I'm a Christian, but I don't expect that everyone should convert to Christianity just because it is my religion. And I don't hold it against anyone if they practice a different religion.

When we raced at Mountaineer we got offers from the killer man to sell our horse. I went to great lengths to make sure that didn't happen. I still get emails from one lady who bought one of our horses for what the killer man would have given us. She turned it into a very good jumper in Georgia.

A lot of people don't run their stables like that. They sell to the killer man. I don't hold it against it them. It's not a decent way to salvage a buck IMHO.

Being a killer man is an honest living. And they are filling a need. They have a different feeling toward horses than me. They probably have families to feed. And pet food manufacturers have employees to pay. Dogs and cats need meat. It's not the way I'd choose to make a living, but it's their choice.

Plus, at least the horses are not being killed for nothing like greyhounds.

PA -- Lewis and Clark also ate dogs for food. So did the Indians. So there is a history of eating pets in this country. The Judeo-Christian belief systems of European immigrants are not the only set of correct beliefs.

[Observer]

One thing is certain -- horses have a greater chance of a fatal injury while racing than when standing in a pasture.

Yes, and every time a human gets out of bed, they risk fatal injury .. forget about getting behind the wheel to actually go somewhere. Some people can partner with a horse, and be proud of the teamwork that evolves.

So perhaps it would be best to release all horses into the wild and let nature run her course. Some horses would die of starvation, or cold or predators, etc.

I guess you didn't know the government changed some laws so that wild horses are no longer protected, and can actually be wrangled and sent to slaughter??? Yeah, that's nature at work.

On the other hand, if we could take some of those wild horses and domestic them and somehow make them an economic asset then there would be incentive for people to keep and own them.


I guess you didn't know there are programs out there to do such things, especially now that wild horses are such huge targets, primarily from cattle farmers.

But I get your attempts.

Sorry everyone, but to me, horses are companions, and you don't send a companion off to slaughter. There is nothing humane about it. Humane euthanasia is putting an animal into a peaceful, permanent sleep when there are no other options, not smacking it in the head, hanging it upside down by a single hind leg, slicing its throat, ripping its hide off, etc. out of a matter of convenience.

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

If you wanted to open a dog and cat fur ranch, I have no problem with it. It seems a major objection to processing horse meat is that horses are not raised for processing. By specifically raising cats and dogs to harvest fur you circumvent the objection of specifity of purpose. Several cultures raise dogs and cats for food and I am sure they use the fur and other remains for some byproduct.

[highnote]

Yes, and every time a human gets out of bed, they risk fatal injury .. forget about getting behind the wheel to actually go somewhere.

Yeah but there's nobody on my back with a whip in their hand pushing me to go harder. Oh wait... that's not always true. :D


Some people can partner with a horse, and be proud of the teamwork that evolves.

I bet the horse is proud of that partnership, too. Probably stands around the feed bin telling all his stablemates about it. :D



I guess you didn't know the government changed some laws so that wild horses are no longer protected, and can actually be wrangled and sent to slaughter??? Yeah, that's nature at work.

Good guess. But I already knew that. Technically, it is nature at work. Humans are part of nature.

I was not being literal. I was merely trying to make a point.



I guess you didn't know there are programs out there to do such things, especially now that wild horses are such huge targets, primarily from cattle farmers.

But I get your attempts.

What do you mean, "I get your attempts"?

Sorry everyone, but to me, horses are companions, and you don't send a companion off to slaughter. There is nothing humane about it.

I never said there was anything humane about it. That's why I didn't sell my horses to the killer man.

Humane euthanasia is putting an animal into a peaceful, permanent sleep when there are no other options, not smacking it in the head, hanging it upside down by a single hind leg, slicing its throat, ripping its hide off, etc. out of a matter of convenience.


Are you a vegetarian? Because it sounds like you could be describing cattle, hog and chicken processing, too.

Much as I don't like to think about how slaughterhouses function, I still eat meat.

[highnote]

PA:

If you wanted to open a dog and cat fur ranch, I have no problem with it. It seems a major objection to processing horse meat is that horses are not raised for processing. By specifically raising cats and dogs to harvest fur you circumvent the objection of specifity of purpose. Several cultures raise dogs and cats for food and I am sure they use the fur and other remains for some byproduct.

Rabbits: Pets or food?

[Show Me the Wire]

swetyejohn:

It is the double standard. It is okay to smack it in the head, hang it upside down by a single hind leg, slice its throat, rip its hide off, etc. out of a matter of convenience as long as it is a cow, chicken, or pig.

[Show Me the Wire]

swetyejohn:

To me both. I eat rabbit and also had a Dutch something as a pet.
But I did not eat my pet, when he died of natural causes.

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

After some reflection, I probably unknowingly chowed down on cat too as I had some very oriental friends.

[highnote]

swetyejohn:

To me both. I eat rabbit and also had a Dutch something as a pet.
But I did not eat my pet, when he died of natural causes.


One man's pet is another man's supper.

I guess it's kind of like drinking water on some of these planned long distance space missions. Urine is captured, processed, used for watering plants and then captured again and then consummed by humans. In actual fact, the urine could be processed and drank. But they go through the extra step because it makes it seem less like they are drinking urine.

Well, I guess it's not really the same thing, but it is an interesting fact of space travel.

[highnote]

PA:

After some reflection, I probably unknowingly chowed down on cat too as I had some very oriental friends.


My brother was in the Peace Corps. He was stationed in Africa. He was out on an expedition and one of the men was cooking a monkey over an open fire. The man took a few bites and said very seriously that monkey meat tastes a little like human meat. Apparantly the man had tried human meat before. :eek:

[Show Me the Wire]

My brother was in the Peace Corps. He was stationed in Africa. He was out on an expedition and one of the men was cooking a monkey over an open fire. The man took a few bites and said very seriously that monkey meat tastes a little like human meat. Apparantly the man had tried human meat before. :eek:

That's hard to digest.

[highnote]

That's hard to digest.


LOL

[PaceAdvantage]

If you wanted to open a dog and cat fur ranch, I have no problem with it. It seems a major objection to processing horse meat is that horses are not raised for processing. By specifically raising cats and dogs to harvest fur you circumvent the objection of specifity of purpose. Several cultures raise dogs and cats for food and I am sure they use the fur and other remains for some byproduct.

No, no, no....I wouldn't open a ranch. There is no ranch on these equine slaughterhouse properties. What I would do is have folks drop by and dump off their unwanted furry friends. I would also round up all the strays in the neighborhood and whatnot. You know, the same way folks dump off their unwanted horses and the same way they are rounding up some of the wild horses as well.....

No time for raising dog and cats specifically for this purpose, not for me....it would be the same exact scenario as now exists for horses. I know of nowhere in the United States where horses are specifically being raised for the slaughterhouse end product.

As I've said before, in life, lines are drawn, and this line is a no-brainer for many.

[highnote]

Here are some links to fascinating reading regarding horsemeat. As I suspected, the taboo of eating horsemeat in this country has it's roots in Judeo-Christianity.

Reading these articles from Wikipedia especially has been a real eye-opener --assuming they are true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_meat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_meat#The_taboo

also on widipedia....
Horse meat produced in the U.S. is also sold to zoos for carnivore feeding, due to its high protein content. The 1986 Kentucky Derby winner and 1987 U.S. Eclipse Award for Horse of the Year winner, Ferdinand, is believed to have been slaughtered in Japan, likely for pet food. [2]

Harvard University's Harvard Faculty Club had horse meat on the menu for over one hundred years, until 1983.

It might have been dumb of the Japanese owners to sell Ferdinand for pet food. Maybe they should have realized that they could have sold him for a lot more to some wealthy US person who would have given him a nice pension. Who wouldn't want Ferdinand on their farm? Hell, I'd have bought him if I had the money. I'd love to take him trail riding. Of course, if he was sick and was going to die, maybe they figured they'd make the maximum amount of money by selling him to the killer man.

According to the Pet Food Institute Horse Meat is generally not used for pet food nor is it raised commerically for pet food. I think generally is the operative word here.

http://www.petfoodinstitute.org/what_is_history.cfm
History of Pet Food


http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Pet-Food.html
Raw Materials
The primary ingredients in pet food are byproducts of meat, poultry, and seafood, feed grains, and soybean meal. Among the animals used in rendering are livestock, horses, and house pets which have been put to sleep. The National Animal Control Association estimated that each year about 5 million pets were shipped to rendering plants and recycled into pet food during the 1990s. They are generally listed as meat or bone meal in the ingredient lists.

[DJofSD]

the taboo of eating horsemeat in this country has it's roots in Judeo-Christianity.

Yes, it's that cloven hoof thingy.

Thanks for the links.