and have known for a long time.......
I've been reading the past month or so about the "Sugarcreek Saves". A group of Anti Slaughter women have decided to try something different.....instead of showing up at the Pennsylvania Horse sale with Television cameras, or Newspaper reporters, and making a huge scene, they went to the auction house owner and did the unthinkable. They asked if they could buy out of his Kill Pen. And guess what? He said yes. Now, for the Anti crowd, this is highly unusual behavior. It lacks the required drama of going through the pens before the sale, dragging horses around, demanding already overworked vets and handlers attend to a few horses when they already are trying to handle hundreds. It lacks the calls to Law enforcement and Animal Cruelty Officers to get there and "DO SOMETHING NOW!!!!". And it lacks the calling out of the Auction House owner for the dirty rotten money grubbing bastard he really is for allowing all of the pain and suffering that has been inflicted upon these horses. It robs one of their seemingly required 15 minutes of fame. In short, it calls for a calm head, cooperation with "the other side", and a plan. And I applaud it wholeheartedly.It has also given some of the Anti Slaughter people involved a knowledge that most of the "pro slaughter" or "pro horse" people have known, and have been trying to tell them for some time now. You cannot save them all. I was very proud of the group of women who undertook this project. They went in, evaluated the horses, and stayed the course. There were requests from those donating funds to pull horses that were not sound, or were not safe, and God bless these women, they refused. they took the horses they deemed best suited for homes. They refused to pull horses to euthanise them, and spent the money they had on those with a future. Hard decisions, and tough women, I'm sure to make them in the face of the pressure to give in to the emotion that often accompanies many of the Anti saves.These women are now learning what we already know. There are not enough homes for all of the nice horses. And as hard as it is to turn away from the soft eye, or the beckoning nicker, common sense has it's very necessary place in these decisions. But we know that reality has to play into our decisions, and I am impressed with the women who undertook this save and dealt with the reality rather than give in to the fantasy. It's a hard call to make.And we know, as they are learning, the saving is the beginning of the journey, not the end. After the drama and the adrenaline of the "save" has worn off, we have the reality.....horses in need of homes. These women knew that you don't pull 20 if you only have placement for 5. Kudos to them for pulling only those they had Fosters and home offers for. They have gotten permission from the owner of the Auction House to buy as many as they can take on a weekly basis. They're working on a plan to have the cash in hand, and homes ready for the ones they buy. They don't know it, but they're a lot like those of us on the opposing side. They've gone into this with open eyes and clear heads, and done what they can. Great job girls, may you be an example that more on the Anti side follow. We're more alike than you know, and if we're ever at the sale at the same time, I'd be proud to shake your hands, or help load a horse or two.
R.H2
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Consistency Or The Lack There Of:
Consistent….We all know what it means literally. Consistence is important in any industry. It may be more important in the livestock and horse industries than anywhere. Breeders strive to produce consistently good foal crops. Trainers use conditioning, repetitive cues, body positioning, and timing to promote automatic consistent response and performance in their pupils. Stockmen research consistent quality nutritional programs to insure growth, health, and optimum performance in their animals. It doesn’t matter whether the desired performance is meat production, reproduction, or in the case of the horse, actual under saddle performance, consistent husbandry is all important.
Consistent animal husbandry takes a great deal of investment, time, facilities, labor, education, and perhaps most importantly, personal responsibility. I have noticed a great deal of inconsistency going on in the “New Age Humane Morality Horse Culture Industry”. And yes, I do consider it an industry. The donation, distribution, administration allocation, and in general “we need your help in cash to help us” mentality has made this a lucrative profession for many. One thing sorely lacking is consistency.
Man trains wild horses to save their lives
written by: Heidi McGuire , Backpack Journalist
created: 11/1/2008 4:26:29 PM
Last updated: 11/2/2008 10:32:51 PM
"A mustang is not a horse that wants to sit in a stall all day. It's a horse that wants to be outdoors and wants to work," he said. The horses come first. "I'll feed them before I feed myself,"
"Once you figure out their different personalities you can start to train them," he said. This is considered the real deal on helping mustangs, This was written about the Three Strikes Mustang Ranch run by Jason Meduna in Alliance, Nebraska. His consistency and dedication to good horse husbandry lasted not even 6 months longer. The footage I saw/read would indicate Mr. Meduna has some very deep personal issues and these horses probably can’t stand a whole lot more “rescuing”. Considering the time it takes a horse to starve to death and from reading the local accounts of this man and his operation, it’s fairly safe to assume wheels of this monstrous neglect/abuse case where already in motion when this interview was given. Mr. Meduna was boasting and I am sure the anti-slaughter forums were patting him on the back but those 200 horses were already heading into the winter from hell. Nebraska is animal agriculture from the roots up yet it took a horse “rescuer” to put the largest case of animal neglect in state history on the books. Can this be called inconsistent?
Following the Three Strikes case leads us to another blaring example of inconsistency. When animal rights groups were writing about the death of a Harry Vold bronc at Cheyenne Frontier Days this July they seem to have completely forgotten how only 2 months earlier Frontier Park had housed the Three Strikes evacuees. "Strawberry Fudge" was a healthy exuberant 4 year old when she flipped over outside the bucking chute. She posed no health risk to anyone other than the rider she fell on and herself. It’s pretty safe to say she had run on productively managed range and was well fed her entire life.
The Three Strikes horses were carrying who knows what diseases. Meduna, himself, was copping a plea, saying they had some exotic ailment or poisoning, not starving, parasite ridden, and sand filled. They had been running on rangeland so decimated by the lack of management of their owner it may never recover. These death warmed over looking creatures were housed in the same pens which would in a very short time be housing the elite performance stock of Frontier Days. Those of us in the livestock industry know only too well how disease can be transmitted to the ground and fixtures in a facility. Would this be inconsistency?
PETA was contacted after the torture of the good barrel horse Dually in Fort Pierre. Interested? Not a chance. Rope a steer at Frontier Days and they’re all over that. Shock a bronc or bull that stalls in the chutes and that’s a big deal. Inconsistency????
The moral indiscretions of the author of a popular anti-slaughter humane treatment issue blog are quickly becoming common internet gossip fodder. True or not, doesn’t really matter. Another example of ‘do as I say not as I do’ is bouncing around the net. Credibility is being questioned and yet another humane issue paradox is on the way.
Meanwhile back at the ranch……. Mr. Meduna’s neighbors are caring for their stock same as they always have. Harry Vold has shipped the rest of his healthy, well fed stock on to the next rodeo. The ranches of the west prepare for the annual production sale season. Decades old traditions for most of these horse programs, yet they are being ridiculed by those who can’t ride on the same side of the fence for more than one issue or maintain structure in their own personal lives. How’s that for inconsistent logic?????
R.H.1
Consistent animal husbandry takes a great deal of investment, time, facilities, labor, education, and perhaps most importantly, personal responsibility. I have noticed a great deal of inconsistency going on in the “New Age Humane Morality Horse Culture Industry”. And yes, I do consider it an industry. The donation, distribution, administration allocation, and in general “we need your help in cash to help us” mentality has made this a lucrative profession for many. One thing sorely lacking is consistency.
Man trains wild horses to save their lives
written by: Heidi McGuire , Backpack Journalist
created: 11/1/2008 4:26:29 PM
Last updated: 11/2/2008 10:32:51 PM
"A mustang is not a horse that wants to sit in a stall all day. It's a horse that wants to be outdoors and wants to work," he said. The horses come first. "I'll feed them before I feed myself,"
"Once you figure out their different personalities you can start to train them," he said. This is considered the real deal on helping mustangs, This was written about the Three Strikes Mustang Ranch run by Jason Meduna in Alliance, Nebraska. His consistency and dedication to good horse husbandry lasted not even 6 months longer. The footage I saw/read would indicate Mr. Meduna has some very deep personal issues and these horses probably can’t stand a whole lot more “rescuing”. Considering the time it takes a horse to starve to death and from reading the local accounts of this man and his operation, it’s fairly safe to assume wheels of this monstrous neglect/abuse case where already in motion when this interview was given. Mr. Meduna was boasting and I am sure the anti-slaughter forums were patting him on the back but those 200 horses were already heading into the winter from hell. Nebraska is animal agriculture from the roots up yet it took a horse “rescuer” to put the largest case of animal neglect in state history on the books. Can this be called inconsistent?
Following the Three Strikes case leads us to another blaring example of inconsistency. When animal rights groups were writing about the death of a Harry Vold bronc at Cheyenne Frontier Days this July they seem to have completely forgotten how only 2 months earlier Frontier Park had housed the Three Strikes evacuees. "Strawberry Fudge" was a healthy exuberant 4 year old when she flipped over outside the bucking chute. She posed no health risk to anyone other than the rider she fell on and herself. It’s pretty safe to say she had run on productively managed range and was well fed her entire life.
The Three Strikes horses were carrying who knows what diseases. Meduna, himself, was copping a plea, saying they had some exotic ailment or poisoning, not starving, parasite ridden, and sand filled. They had been running on rangeland so decimated by the lack of management of their owner it may never recover. These death warmed over looking creatures were housed in the same pens which would in a very short time be housing the elite performance stock of Frontier Days. Those of us in the livestock industry know only too well how disease can be transmitted to the ground and fixtures in a facility. Would this be inconsistency?
PETA was contacted after the torture of the good barrel horse Dually in Fort Pierre. Interested? Not a chance. Rope a steer at Frontier Days and they’re all over that. Shock a bronc or bull that stalls in the chutes and that’s a big deal. Inconsistency????
The moral indiscretions of the author of a popular anti-slaughter humane treatment issue blog are quickly becoming common internet gossip fodder. True or not, doesn’t really matter. Another example of ‘do as I say not as I do’ is bouncing around the net. Credibility is being questioned and yet another humane issue paradox is on the way.
Meanwhile back at the ranch……. Mr. Meduna’s neighbors are caring for their stock same as they always have. Harry Vold has shipped the rest of his healthy, well fed stock on to the next rodeo. The ranches of the west prepare for the annual production sale season. Decades old traditions for most of these horse programs, yet they are being ridiculed by those who can’t ride on the same side of the fence for more than one issue or maintain structure in their own personal lives. How’s that for inconsistent logic?????
R.H.1
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Conformation 2 - Balance
Balance is a key characteristic in any breed. To check for balance, I divide a horse's body into three sections: from poll to point of withers, from point of withers to loins, and from loins to point of buttocks. If these sections are equal in length and muscling, the horse has balance and evenly distributed muscling. I also want a horse's withers to be level with--or higher than--his hips for hindquarters propulsion.
As for correct structure, I look for properly aligned front legs; well-sloped pasterns; and well-angled, lowset hocks. When a horse possesses both balance and correct leg structure, his conformation meets the form-to-function standard. That means he should be a good mover and able to withstand demanding events without developing soundness problems.
This is a quote from a conformation clinic article written by Patti Carter. This same basic statement in one form or another is echoed by each professional asked to take part in the Horse & Rider/Practical Horseman conformation clinics. I agree with them completely. Most horsemen have list of conformation shortcomings they can or can’t forgive in a horse. As we move away from the generation of horsemen who not only needed an individual to go to the track, show ring, or rodeo arena on the weekends but could work for a living at home during the week we seem to be losing site of the importance of structural balance and how it relates to long term soundness in our horses.
This pretty colored filly is bred to go low and slow. She will most likely do that. She has an in style pedigree, great color, and virtually no shoulder. It ties into her back almost directly above her foreleg. She will absorb both her own weigh and her rider’s almost directly up through her leg bones. If this filly were squared up as she should be we could see how disproportioned her rear legs are when compared to her front. She looks as though she would “drive” her forelegs into the ground with every stride. Makes ‘em low and slow but also makes them unhandy and predisposed for front end problems. This filly is young and will even up some as she matures but the length of the leg bones doesn’t change all that much. Hence the ball park accuracy of the “string test” for mature height.
This bay filly has the same basic shoulder/hip conformation as the first filly. In spite of the same straight, steep shoulder, forelegs, long back, and short hip she is better balanced. The first filly does have a better set of withers. The more even length of her front cannon bones as compared to the back places her knees and hocks roughly the same distance off the ground. The length of her forearm compared to the length of her gaskin is better also. We dealt with legs earlier but I have to come back to them here. She has upright long boned legs with the tendons tying into the knee very close to the cannon bone, this was referred to as tied in tendons and was considered a conformational fault when I was being schooled. Generally speaking, the closer to the ground a horse’s knees and hocks, the closer to the ground his center of gravity, the handier and more agile he is. She is a very fashionably bred and connected hunt seat filly.
Bob Loomis explains balance using the trapezoid. I learned this theory years ago as balance triangles. The principle is still the same. It uses the trapezoid to illustrate the importance of equal angles in the shoulder and hip connected with a short strong back.
As for correct structure, I look for properly aligned front legs; well-sloped pasterns; and well-angled, lowset hocks. When a horse possesses both balance and correct leg structure, his conformation meets the form-to-function standard. That means he should be a good mover and able to withstand demanding events without developing soundness problems.
This is a quote from a conformation clinic article written by Patti Carter. This same basic statement in one form or another is echoed by each professional asked to take part in the Horse & Rider/Practical Horseman conformation clinics. I agree with them completely. Most horsemen have list of conformation shortcomings they can or can’t forgive in a horse. As we move away from the generation of horsemen who not only needed an individual to go to the track, show ring, or rodeo arena on the weekends but could work for a living at home during the week we seem to be losing site of the importance of structural balance and how it relates to long term soundness in our horses.
This pretty colored filly is bred to go low and slow. She will most likely do that. She has an in style pedigree, great color, and virtually no shoulder. It ties into her back almost directly above her foreleg. She will absorb both her own weigh and her rider’s almost directly up through her leg bones. If this filly were squared up as she should be we could see how disproportioned her rear legs are when compared to her front. She looks as though she would “drive” her forelegs into the ground with every stride. Makes ‘em low and slow but also makes them unhandy and predisposed for front end problems. This filly is young and will even up some as she matures but the length of the leg bones doesn’t change all that much. Hence the ball park accuracy of the “string test” for mature height. 
This bay filly has the same basic shoulder/hip conformation as the first filly. In spite of the same straight, steep shoulder, forelegs, long back, and short hip she is better balanced. The first filly does have a better set of withers. The more even length of her front cannon bones as compared to the back places her knees and hocks roughly the same distance off the ground. The length of her forearm compared to the length of her gaskin is better also. We dealt with legs earlier but I have to come back to them here. She has upright long boned legs with the tendons tying into the knee very close to the cannon bone, this was referred to as tied in tendons and was considered a conformational fault when I was being schooled. Generally speaking, the closer to the ground a horse’s knees and hocks, the closer to the ground his center of gravity, the handier and more agile he is. She is a very fashionably bred and connected hunt seat filly.
Bob Loomis explains balance using the trapezoid. I learned this theory years ago as balance triangles. The principle is still the same. It uses the trapezoid to illustrate the importance of equal angles in the shoulder and hip connected with a short strong back.
The horse’s body is again divided into thirds. The first third is point of shoulder to elbow. Second third is point of elbow to point of stifle. Third is point of stifle to buttock. This is the bottom line. The poll to wither should be the same length, as the point of shoulder to the point of withers. The withers to the point of hip should be the same length as the neck, the shoulder to withers, and the hip to the buttock. This was explained to me as a 4-H kid (back when the wheel was square) was in the form of three equilateral triangles. There should be three equilateral triangles in a balanced horse, two upright and one inverted. The point of shoulder to the point of withers to center of the bottom line, the other upright triangle is the point of hip to the buttock to center of the bottom line. The inverted triangle’s point is formed at the center balance in the horse’s bottom line. Its two sides by the lines from point of wither to center of bottom line to the point of hip and it’s top by the length of the back from wither to hip. In my humble opinion the closer to the center of the bottom line (center of the horse) the horse carries the weight of his rider and his own center of balance the better he is going to “feel” to me.
The good legs we were looking for last time should be under this balanced body to make a horse with functionally correct conformation. The length of the total parts change from a 16.2 hand horse as opposed to a 14.2 horse but the correct proportional ratios stay the same.
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Fall Of Fugly? FHOTD blog changes.
The Fall Of Fugly
Anyone familiar with the internet has most likely read or atleast heard of the "Fugly Horse of the Day" blog. Some love it, some not so much. Fugly professes to be an expert on conformation, to have "the eye" when it comes to Thoroughbreds, and is Anti Slaughter.She also has no problem "outing" those she feels needs it. Those needing outing can be guilty of any variety of offenses....backyard breeding, having the wrong tack, dressing badly, being overweight, being ugly, being stupid, or just getting on the wrong side of Fugly. Fugly has a group of followers ready and willing to mass e-mail and harass anyone unfortunate enough to fall under Fugly's radar. They are merciless, and age is no barrier.So, it was a little surprising to hear this past week that Fugly had shut down the "comment" section of her Blog where she and her group often tear their "victim of the Day" to shreds and report on what they have done to them.Speculation, of course, is varied. Allegations of Fugly's personal and financial misdeeds had been brought up, and discussed. The comments were not to the liking of some of the "fugly faithful" who tried in vain to remind those making the less than flattering charges that Fugly's blog was indeed a place to discuss serious horse issues only. Those who have read attacks on the Victims of the Day in the past probably got quite a laugh from that!So Fugly, who has never cared about little things like Copyright laws, the feelings of others, no matter what their age, mental capabilities, financial situations, or anything else for that matter, suddenly chose to take the high road. She will now publish the "5 best" comments she receives each day. Can anyone say damage control?Sure, the gossip is good, and the allegations will continue to fly in light of her decision to shut down the comment option. The blog may even end up disappearing. If it does, I for one will be glad.Fugly has long been a "voice" for the Anti Slaughter movement. And I, as a horse owner have long questioned if someone like her is what we want or need as a representation for EITHER side of this issue. Do we really want the Equine industry represented by someone who regularly uses foul language, and encourages mob mentality online? Who attacks other human beings for the sheer entertainment value of it?Is it wise to have as a representative of our cause someone who promotes breeding when the equine population is already out of control because they feel they have "the eye"? Surely we can all agree there are enough Thoroughbreds in need of homes, does any one need to breed the ones rescued from the kill lots?And we certainly don't need someone who refuses to even have a conversation with anyone with an opposing view.Fugly has done a lot of good in her rescue efforts, but the blog, and her actions resulting from that blog have made her far more of a liability than an asset to the anti side of this issue, and to the Equine community in general.
R.H.2
quote.....
"Apologies to those of you who were responsibly using the comments; however, Blogger rules were broken with regard to the harrassment of individuals other than myself and so they have gone away until I can come up with a reasonable solution that does not add hours of work to my day."
Anyone familiar with the internet has most likely read or atleast heard of the "Fugly Horse of the Day" blog. Some love it, some not so much. Fugly professes to be an expert on conformation, to have "the eye" when it comes to Thoroughbreds, and is Anti Slaughter.She also has no problem "outing" those she feels needs it. Those needing outing can be guilty of any variety of offenses....backyard breeding, having the wrong tack, dressing badly, being overweight, being ugly, being stupid, or just getting on the wrong side of Fugly. Fugly has a group of followers ready and willing to mass e-mail and harass anyone unfortunate enough to fall under Fugly's radar. They are merciless, and age is no barrier.So, it was a little surprising to hear this past week that Fugly had shut down the "comment" section of her Blog where she and her group often tear their "victim of the Day" to shreds and report on what they have done to them.Speculation, of course, is varied. Allegations of Fugly's personal and financial misdeeds had been brought up, and discussed. The comments were not to the liking of some of the "fugly faithful" who tried in vain to remind those making the less than flattering charges that Fugly's blog was indeed a place to discuss serious horse issues only. Those who have read attacks on the Victims of the Day in the past probably got quite a laugh from that!So Fugly, who has never cared about little things like Copyright laws, the feelings of others, no matter what their age, mental capabilities, financial situations, or anything else for that matter, suddenly chose to take the high road. She will now publish the "5 best" comments she receives each day. Can anyone say damage control?Sure, the gossip is good, and the allegations will continue to fly in light of her decision to shut down the comment option. The blog may even end up disappearing. If it does, I for one will be glad.Fugly has long been a "voice" for the Anti Slaughter movement. And I, as a horse owner have long questioned if someone like her is what we want or need as a representation for EITHER side of this issue. Do we really want the Equine industry represented by someone who regularly uses foul language, and encourages mob mentality online? Who attacks other human beings for the sheer entertainment value of it?Is it wise to have as a representative of our cause someone who promotes breeding when the equine population is already out of control because they feel they have "the eye"? Surely we can all agree there are enough Thoroughbreds in need of homes, does any one need to breed the ones rescued from the kill lots?And we certainly don't need someone who refuses to even have a conversation with anyone with an opposing view.Fugly has done a lot of good in her rescue efforts, but the blog, and her actions resulting from that blog have made her far more of a liability than an asset to the anti side of this issue, and to the Equine community in general.
R.H.2
quote.....
"Apologies to those of you who were responsibly using the comments; however, Blogger rules were broken with regard to the harrassment of individuals other than myself and so they have gone away until I can come up with a reasonable solution that does not add hours of work to my day."
Sunday, July 26, 2009
HSUS- Dumb or Dishonest? ... or both?
Sometime They (HSUS) Play Right Into Dumb Without Realizing It or I Think They are Really Serious About This Being Important Information
Humane Society of the US Compiles State-by-State Regulations and Resources for Horse Euthanasia, Carcass Disposal.
When it comes to burying a horse, not all states are created equal. The same adage applies if you are looking for a rendering plant or a low-cost euthanasia program.But how would the average horse owner ever know?Enter the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which has compiled what looks to be a valuable tool for veterinarians, rescue workers, and owners or holders of unwanted horses who are looking for an alternative to sending a horse to slaughter but don't know what their choices are. Hopefully, states will add services and resources as awareness grows, and also correct or add to their listings, so this resource will develop and grow.
This was posted by Fran Jurga on "http://equisearch.com/" . Actually the link she posted didn’t work but she graciously credited fuglyhorseofthedayblogspot with the information so I followed the bread crumbs.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
fuglyhorseoftheday blogspot Yes we are doing something (Well not really, but I suppose we should at least give you credit for a barely scratching the surface research project).
Anti-slaughter advocates are frequently criticized for not providing affordable options to slaughter. In reply, I'd like to present the new HSUS equine resources. What a great and much needed resource! Please send to your friends and cross post to other message boards. Who knows how many horses this will save? My guess would be damn few but I tend to be a bit on the cynical side. A true follower of the cause chimes in first in an attempt to divert attention from the obvious……….
The reason those that say anti slaughter folks don't do anything to help the horses, is that they are trying to detract and want to promote horse slaughter, usually because they are making money off of it. Then they might have to try and get a real job instead of butchering horses. The kill buyers I have met are usually uneducated and can't make a living in a real profession.
Next person to comment actually read the site……….How does that link help people without money euth/dispose of their horses?Besides, the information is flawed. Under crematory services for Virginia, there's not ONE service that's actually in Virginia. One is in Maryland, another's in Iowa, and the third and last one listed is in Idaho. How the heck is that helpful?This list MIGHT be useful if folks have a ton of money to spend on euthing/disposal of bodies. It still doesn't address the issue of people who have run out of finances AND options.
As did this one………That list isn't quite as helpful as you'd think. I live in Maine, of the 5 or 6 places listed all except one are out of state which means transporting the carcass several hundred miles depending on where you live in the state. The sole in-state option is actually a butcher which I think is rather at odds with what the purpose of the list is. Quite frankly, these are not affordable options for anyone living in my area.
And this one agreed with the one person who could and actually did read, think about simple economics, did the math, and consulted the U.S. map……Mack Truck is right... it's flawed because those are the only ones in VA that will accept private owners remains. No it's not the list makers fault but um, still doesn't help people too much. I have heard good things about the MD people for my area... (SE VA) but what about SW VA? Long haul. If you have no $$$ for it's still not that helpful.
Some of these people might actually be paying attention to reality somewhere.
"http://www.hsus.org/horses_equines/resources/"
This is the actual website that does work. I am not so generous with my pat on the back for whoever compiled this information. I will grant you I didn’t read the entire site. Pretty much didn’t have to see it could have been put together by any junior high student with an internet connection and few hours to spend.
Here are some things I found interesting during my quick look see…..
These two websites were in the Equine Crematory information category for every state……..How did that happen??????
Ashes to Ashes Pet Cremation
22331 590th Street
Pomeroy, IA 50575 712-358-2600 "http://www.ncn.net/~scottdev"
Memorial Pet Care
654 E. King Street
Meridian, ID 83642 208-887-7669
This is used to dodge the “landfills (waste management facility, isn’t that cute???) don’t accept dead animals” excuse. See they told us it was just an excuse…… and yes, they do use the same phone number for all states. Come on somebody call the number to get information….. please call it just once. Maybe I will just for the fun of it…
Waste Management ® accepts equine carcasses at some but not all locations. To find out if your local Waste Management location will take horse carcasses, please contact them: "http://www.wm.com/" ; 800-963-4776
They did at least take the time to pull each state’s dead animal disposal laws out their respective state statute codes. There is no mention of how county or township zoning laws may affect these.
The state veterinary teaching college is used as each state’s euthanasia contact. A few more populated states do have more listings, but it still looks like a pretty broad surface job in researching contacts to me. Or maybe there are actually no programs out there?????
Near as I can tell $30,000,000 is still unaccounted for in HSUS spending. It obviously wasn’t spent on research, consulting, or anything to do with compiling the information put forth in this study.
R.H1
7 Things You Didn't Know About HSUS
Consumer Freedom
1) The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a “humane society” in name only, since it doesn’t operate a single pet shelter or pet adoption facility anywhere in the United States. During 2007, HSUS contributed only 3.64 percent of its budget to organizations that operate hands-on dog and cat shelters. In reality, HSUS is a wealthy animal-rights lobbying organization (the largest and richest on earth) that agitates for the same goals as PETA and other radical groups.
2) Beginning on the day of NFL quarterback Michael Vick’s 2007 dogfighting indictment, HSUS raised money online with the false promise that it would “care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case.” The New York Times later reported that HSUS wasn’t caring for Vick’s dogs at all. And HSUS president Wayne Pacelle told the Times that his group recommended that government officials “put down” (that is, kill) the dogs rather than adopt them out to suitable homes. HSUS later quietly altered its Internet fundraising pitch.
3) HSUS’s senior management includes a former spokesman for the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), a criminal group designated as “terrorists” by the FBI. HSUS president Wayne Pacelle hired John “J.P.” Goodwin in 1997, the same year Goodwin described himself as “spokesperson for the ALF” while he fielded media calls in the wake of an ALF arson attack at a California veal processing plant. In 1997, when asked by reporters for a reaction to an ALF arson fire at a farmer’s feed co-op in Utah (which nearly killed a family sleeping on the premises), Goodwin replied, “We’re ecstatic.” That same year, Goodwin was arrested at a UC Davis protest celebrating the 10-year anniversary of an ALF arson at the university that caused $5 million in damage. And in 1998, Goodwin described himself publicly as a “former member of ALF.”
4) According to a 2008 Los Angeles Times investigation, less than 12 percent of money raised for HSUS by California telemarketers actually ends up in HSUS’s bank account. The rest is kept by professional fundraisers. And if you exclude two campaigns run for HSUS by the “Build-a-Bear Workshop” retail chain, which consisted of the sale of surplus stuffed animals (not really “fundraising”), HSUS’s yield number shrinks to just 3 percent. Sadly, this appears typical. In 2004, HSUS ran a telemarketing campaign in Connecticut with fundraisers who promised to return a minimum of zero percent of the proceeds. The campaign raised over $1.4 million. Not only did absolutely none of that money go to HSUS, but the group paid $175,000 for the telemarketing work.
5) Research shows that HSUS’s heavily promoted U.S. “boycott” of Canadian seafood—announced in 2005 as a protest against Canada’s annual seal hunt—is a phony exercise in media manipulation. A 2006 investigation found that 78 percent of the restaurants and seafood distributors described by HSUS as “boycotters” weren’t participating at all. Nearly two-thirds of them told surveyors they were completely unaware HSUS was using their names in connection with an international boycott campaign. Canada’s federal government is on record about this deception, saying: “Some animal rights groups have been misleading the public for years … it’s no surprise at all that the richest of them would mislead the public with a phony seafood boycott.”
6) HSUS raised a reported $34 million in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, supposedly to help reunite lost pets with their owners. But comparatively little of that money was spent for its intended purpose. Louisiana’s Attorney General shuttered his 18-month-long investigation into where most of these millions went, shortly after HSUS announced its plan to contribute $600,000 toward the construction of an animal shelter on the grounds of a state prison. Public disclosures of the disposition of the $34 million in Katrina-related donations add up to less than $7 million.
7) After gathering undercover video footage of improper animal handling at a Chino, CA slaughterhouse during November of 2007, HSUS sat on its video evidence for three months, even refusing to share it with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. HSUS’s Dr. Michael Greger testified before Congress that the San Bernardino County (CA) District Attorney’s office asked the group “to hold on to the information while they completed their investigation.” But the District Attorney’s office quickly denied that account, even declaring that HSUS refused to make its undercover spy available to investigators if the USDA were present at those meetings. Ultimately, HSUS chose to release its video footage at a more politically opportune time, as it prepared to launch a livestock-related ballot campaign in California. Meanwhile, meat from the slaughterhouse continued to flow into the U.S. food supply for months.
Humane Society of the US Compiles State-by-State Regulations and Resources for Horse Euthanasia, Carcass Disposal.
When it comes to burying a horse, not all states are created equal. The same adage applies if you are looking for a rendering plant or a low-cost euthanasia program.But how would the average horse owner ever know?Enter the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which has compiled what looks to be a valuable tool for veterinarians, rescue workers, and owners or holders of unwanted horses who are looking for an alternative to sending a horse to slaughter but don't know what their choices are. Hopefully, states will add services and resources as awareness grows, and also correct or add to their listings, so this resource will develop and grow.
This was posted by Fran Jurga on "http://equisearch.com/" . Actually the link she posted didn’t work but she graciously credited fuglyhorseofthedayblogspot with the information so I followed the bread crumbs.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
fuglyhorseoftheday blogspot Yes we are doing something (Well not really, but I suppose we should at least give you credit for a barely scratching the surface research project).
Anti-slaughter advocates are frequently criticized for not providing affordable options to slaughter. In reply, I'd like to present the new HSUS equine resources. What a great and much needed resource! Please send to your friends and cross post to other message boards. Who knows how many horses this will save? My guess would be damn few but I tend to be a bit on the cynical side. A true follower of the cause chimes in first in an attempt to divert attention from the obvious……….
The reason those that say anti slaughter folks don't do anything to help the horses, is that they are trying to detract and want to promote horse slaughter, usually because they are making money off of it. Then they might have to try and get a real job instead of butchering horses. The kill buyers I have met are usually uneducated and can't make a living in a real profession.
Next person to comment actually read the site……….How does that link help people without money euth/dispose of their horses?Besides, the information is flawed. Under crematory services for Virginia, there's not ONE service that's actually in Virginia. One is in Maryland, another's in Iowa, and the third and last one listed is in Idaho. How the heck is that helpful?This list MIGHT be useful if folks have a ton of money to spend on euthing/disposal of bodies. It still doesn't address the issue of people who have run out of finances AND options.
As did this one………That list isn't quite as helpful as you'd think. I live in Maine, of the 5 or 6 places listed all except one are out of state which means transporting the carcass several hundred miles depending on where you live in the state. The sole in-state option is actually a butcher which I think is rather at odds with what the purpose of the list is. Quite frankly, these are not affordable options for anyone living in my area.
And this one agreed with the one person who could and actually did read, think about simple economics, did the math, and consulted the U.S. map……Mack Truck is right... it's flawed because those are the only ones in VA that will accept private owners remains. No it's not the list makers fault but um, still doesn't help people too much. I have heard good things about the MD people for my area... (SE VA) but what about SW VA? Long haul. If you have no $$$ for it's still not that helpful.
Some of these people might actually be paying attention to reality somewhere.
"http://www.hsus.org/horses_equines/resources/"
This is the actual website that does work. I am not so generous with my pat on the back for whoever compiled this information. I will grant you I didn’t read the entire site. Pretty much didn’t have to see it could have been put together by any junior high student with an internet connection and few hours to spend.
Here are some things I found interesting during my quick look see…..
These two websites were in the Equine Crematory information category for every state……..How did that happen??????
Ashes to Ashes Pet Cremation
22331 590th Street
Pomeroy, IA 50575 712-358-2600 "http://www.ncn.net/~scottdev"
Memorial Pet Care
654 E. King Street
Meridian, ID 83642 208-887-7669
This is used to dodge the “landfills (waste management facility, isn’t that cute???) don’t accept dead animals” excuse. See they told us it was just an excuse…… and yes, they do use the same phone number for all states. Come on somebody call the number to get information….. please call it just once. Maybe I will just for the fun of it…
Waste Management ® accepts equine carcasses at some but not all locations. To find out if your local Waste Management location will take horse carcasses, please contact them: "http://www.wm.com/" ; 800-963-4776
They did at least take the time to pull each state’s dead animal disposal laws out their respective state statute codes. There is no mention of how county or township zoning laws may affect these.
The state veterinary teaching college is used as each state’s euthanasia contact. A few more populated states do have more listings, but it still looks like a pretty broad surface job in researching contacts to me. Or maybe there are actually no programs out there?????
Near as I can tell $30,000,000 is still unaccounted for in HSUS spending. It obviously wasn’t spent on research, consulting, or anything to do with compiling the information put forth in this study.
R.H1
7 Things You Didn't Know About HSUS
Consumer Freedom
1) The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a “humane society” in name only, since it doesn’t operate a single pet shelter or pet adoption facility anywhere in the United States. During 2007, HSUS contributed only 3.64 percent of its budget to organizations that operate hands-on dog and cat shelters. In reality, HSUS is a wealthy animal-rights lobbying organization (the largest and richest on earth) that agitates for the same goals as PETA and other radical groups.
2) Beginning on the day of NFL quarterback Michael Vick’s 2007 dogfighting indictment, HSUS raised money online with the false promise that it would “care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case.” The New York Times later reported that HSUS wasn’t caring for Vick’s dogs at all. And HSUS president Wayne Pacelle told the Times that his group recommended that government officials “put down” (that is, kill) the dogs rather than adopt them out to suitable homes. HSUS later quietly altered its Internet fundraising pitch.
3) HSUS’s senior management includes a former spokesman for the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), a criminal group designated as “terrorists” by the FBI. HSUS president Wayne Pacelle hired John “J.P.” Goodwin in 1997, the same year Goodwin described himself as “spokesperson for the ALF” while he fielded media calls in the wake of an ALF arson attack at a California veal processing plant. In 1997, when asked by reporters for a reaction to an ALF arson fire at a farmer’s feed co-op in Utah (which nearly killed a family sleeping on the premises), Goodwin replied, “We’re ecstatic.” That same year, Goodwin was arrested at a UC Davis protest celebrating the 10-year anniversary of an ALF arson at the university that caused $5 million in damage. And in 1998, Goodwin described himself publicly as a “former member of ALF.”
4) According to a 2008 Los Angeles Times investigation, less than 12 percent of money raised for HSUS by California telemarketers actually ends up in HSUS’s bank account. The rest is kept by professional fundraisers. And if you exclude two campaigns run for HSUS by the “Build-a-Bear Workshop” retail chain, which consisted of the sale of surplus stuffed animals (not really “fundraising”), HSUS’s yield number shrinks to just 3 percent. Sadly, this appears typical. In 2004, HSUS ran a telemarketing campaign in Connecticut with fundraisers who promised to return a minimum of zero percent of the proceeds. The campaign raised over $1.4 million. Not only did absolutely none of that money go to HSUS, but the group paid $175,000 for the telemarketing work.
5) Research shows that HSUS’s heavily promoted U.S. “boycott” of Canadian seafood—announced in 2005 as a protest against Canada’s annual seal hunt—is a phony exercise in media manipulation. A 2006 investigation found that 78 percent of the restaurants and seafood distributors described by HSUS as “boycotters” weren’t participating at all. Nearly two-thirds of them told surveyors they were completely unaware HSUS was using their names in connection with an international boycott campaign. Canada’s federal government is on record about this deception, saying: “Some animal rights groups have been misleading the public for years … it’s no surprise at all that the richest of them would mislead the public with a phony seafood boycott.”
6) HSUS raised a reported $34 million in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, supposedly to help reunite lost pets with their owners. But comparatively little of that money was spent for its intended purpose. Louisiana’s Attorney General shuttered his 18-month-long investigation into where most of these millions went, shortly after HSUS announced its plan to contribute $600,000 toward the construction of an animal shelter on the grounds of a state prison. Public disclosures of the disposition of the $34 million in Katrina-related donations add up to less than $7 million.
7) After gathering undercover video footage of improper animal handling at a Chino, CA slaughterhouse during November of 2007, HSUS sat on its video evidence for three months, even refusing to share it with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. HSUS’s Dr. Michael Greger testified before Congress that the San Bernardino County (CA) District Attorney’s office asked the group “to hold on to the information while they completed their investigation.” But the District Attorney’s office quickly denied that account, even declaring that HSUS refused to make its undercover spy available to investigators if the USDA were present at those meetings. Ultimately, HSUS chose to release its video footage at a more politically opportune time, as it prepared to launch a livestock-related ballot campaign in California. Meanwhile, meat from the slaughterhouse continued to flow into the U.S. food supply for months.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Now That You Mention It.........
Let’s Call This Entry:
Now That You Mentioned It
One of our new found friends has so kindly brought to my attention I am using “false” USDA numbers. I suppose it would depend on which anti-slaughter website you are reading. The numbers I quoted in the commentary about the 41 mustangs came from http://equineprotectionnetwork.com/slaughter/19802002.htm. This site has a full listing of weekly head counts for each year from 1980 to 2002 I used only the totals in the commentary.
If you go to The Equine Protection web site containing the page updated 2-23-2007 you will find
1995 | 109, 225 | ||
1994 | 107, 209 | ||
1993 | 167, 310 | ||
1992 | 246, 400 | ||
1991 | 276, 900 | ||
1990 | 345,700 | ||
1989 | 348, 400 | ||
1988 | 331, 000 | ||
1987 | 275, 700 | ||
1986 | 202, 100 | ||
1985 | 128, 300 | ||
1984 | 105, 300 | ||
1983 | 99, 300 | ||
1982 | 149, 600 | ||
1981 | 219, 300 | ||
1980 | 274, 500 |
If you happen to pull up the same sites page for 2-16-2006 you find this set of numbers. Sorry I missed copying the 1995 number for this example but you can still grab concept.
1994 | 109,353 | ||
1993 | 184,320 | ||
1992 | 243,585 | ||
1991 | 236,467 | ||
1990 | 315,192 | ||
1989 | 342,877 | ||
1988 | 300,263 | ||
1987 | 246,505 | ||
1986 | 170,576 | ||
1985 | 143,423 | ||
1984 | 105,300 | ||
1983 | 99, 300 | ||
1982 | 149,600 | ||
1981 | 219,300 |
The Equine Protection Network should find a set of numbers they like and stick with them. Using three different sets of numbers makes them look “uneducated”. On the upside I have something to write about, poke fun at, and legitimately question. It was even brought to me gift wrapped.
If you happen to look on http://www.manesandtailsorganization.org/stats.htm you will find
this set of statistics which only go back to 1985 but again I think you can get my drift.
Year
Region
State
Commodity
Period
Livestock Slaughter
Federally Inspected (FI)
Head
1985
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1986
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1987
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1988
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1989
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1990
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1991
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1992
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1993
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1994
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1995
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1996
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1997
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1998
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
1999
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2000
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2001
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2002
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2003
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2004
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2005
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 31
2006
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Dec 30
2007
All States
US
Equine
Jan 1 - Sep 22
I didn’t bother to go to the actual USDA site since it looks as though the actual numbers haven’t been all that important until I brought them up.
Bottom line, if I am bold enough to quote statistics researched them somewhere and saved the research.
Now that you mention it there have been quite a few numbers I’ve run across over the years I’ve been in this debate that vary from site to site or day to day.
R.H 1
Thursday, July 23, 2009
41 MUSTANGS......
I don’t know how many of you are old enough to remember the 70s or the 80s. I happen to be old enough to remember both. Velma Bronn Johnston or Wild Horse Annie campaigned for and Congress passed the Free Roaming Wild Horse and Burro Act. I was 12 and thought it was great. I was 12 and thought no horses should ever die. By the time the 80s rolled around I had developed a little different frame of mind.
I came into the business end of horses during the crash of the 80s. The wide spread liquidation of horses. I watched own sons and daughters of household names go to kill. It was a nearly a decade of farm dispersals, and loaded semis. Here is how it all looked statistically. Incidentally
1980 total number of horses slaughtered 274,500
1981 total number of horses slaughtered 219,300
1982 total number of horses slaughtered 149,600
1983 total number of horses slaughtered 398,500
1984 total number of horses slaughtered 105,300
1985 total number of horses slaughtered 128,300
1986 total number of horses slaughtered 202,100
1987 total number of horses slaughtered 275,700
1988 total number of horses slaughtered 331,000
1989 total number of horses slaughtered 348,400
1990 total number of horses slaughtered 345,700
1991 total number of horses slaughtered 276,900
1992 total number of horses slaughtered 246,400
1993 total number of horses slaughtered 167,310
The total number of horses slaughtered per year leveled off and declined after 1995 to around 100,000 or less.
I think this is probably what caused the lack of unwanted horses in the 90s Alex Brown was referring to in his article stating we could get along without slaughter. Well, yes we nearly did for a few years in the later 90s. We were down to killing only around 50 to 60 thousand head a year.
I was selling horses throughout the 90s and it was very, very good for quite a few years. Kind of thought it might be the reward for those who did manage to survive the 80s. The economy was going well, the liquidation of horses had caused a shortage of the good kind, people could now afford to anti up for something nice and nice was kind of scarce. Point is the good economy and the shortage of horses was responsible for the lack of unwanted horses AND the lower slaughter numbers. Not the lower slaughter number……….so on……..
Why didn’t this mass liquidation of horses trigger full court press for congress to change the laws back then? Why now?
Now even traditional meat animal agriculture is studying the effect of an animal’s comfort and humane treatment on carcass quality. Most livestock production associations have implemented their own quality control, packer incentive programs, and fund research programs. A fascinating person who has contributed greatly to these programs and has done studies on horse slaughter is Temple Grandin please refer to her web site and some very interesting reading. "http://www.templegrandin.com/templehome.html" She also kind of shoots down the “uncaring, unscientific, educationally challenged” animal ag stereotype being pushed around the anti-slaughter sites these days so they prefer not to mention her. If the plants were ever going to become more humane for traditional meat animals or horses it is more likely to happen now than during the bloodbath liquidation of the 80s and early 90s.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has published a final rule Dec. 7, 2001 that establishes minimum standards to ensure the humane movement of equines to slaughtering facilities by way of commercial transportation. These regulations address food, water and rest provided to animals. Owner and shippers of horses are required to take certain actions in loading and transporting the animals, and they must certify that the commercial transportation meets certain requirements. In addition, the regulations prohibit the commercial transportation to slaughtering facilities of horses considered to be unfit for travel, the use of electric prods and, within five years, the use of double-deck trailers. The number of double-deck trailers has been reduced in the last few years, being replaced with single-deck trailers.
This was taken from Web site: "http://www.animalagriculture.org/" inaugural issue of The Equine Heath Report which came out in January 2002.
Even those horrible double deck trailers were going to be phased out by the 2007. This ruling became law in Feb 2002. But even with this ruling in place an APHIS prosecuting violators there was a rush to Congress in 2005. Why now?
41 mustangs, 41 mustangs were sold to slaughter. But first Washington had to get its collective butt in a sling. Bear with me because this is going to get interesting. At least it did to me. I have thought all along the lawmakers in D.C. could care less about the actual horses or people involved with them. This issue has been a sell-out to curry favor among the urban/wall street/celebrity factors who so generously contribute to campaign funds. Here is the not so pretty little industry of no consequence we can do away to make us look good.
The really ironic part of all this…..
I didn’t set out to research this subject or the connection. I was looking for something else entirely but I found…….. a little of the Why now?
April 30, 2004, swimming in a sea of red ink (I think we still are) Lawmakers are skeptical of the Bureau of Land Management's proposal to increase the amount of money spent on wild horse and burro management. Western Republican lawmakers and BLM officials say the populations of wild horses and burros need to decrease. Environmental groups say the agency should reduce the numbers of domestic livestock that, like the wild horses and burros, graze on federal lands. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., chairman of the Senate panel that has jurisdiction over the BLM's budget, is concerned about the agency's proposal. "I think what we should do is put some language in this thing that allows the BLM to sell excess wild horses," Burns said. "I'd prefer to sell 'em to whomever. Maybe some of them will end up going to slaughter."
November 24, 2004, In a reversal of three decades of government policy that protected all wild horses, a provision approved by Congress last weekend would allow some of them to be sold to slaughterhouses. The provision, attached to an omnibus spending bill by Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana and chairman of the appropriations subcommittee with responsibility for the Interior Department, requires the sale of wild horses that have been rounded up and are more than 10 years old or have been unsuccessfully offered for adoption three times.
(The Three Strikes rule)
March 21, 2005, The federal Bureau of Land Management says it is selling wild horses to American Indian tribes for the first time. The BLM has sold 141 horses to the Rosebud Sioux in South Dakota and 120 horses to the Three Affiliated Tribes in North Dakota. More sales are planned in the next several weeks, bringing the total to more than 500 horses.
April 26, 2005, The Interior Department has abruptly halted delivery of wild mustangs to buyers while it investigates the slaughter of 41 wild horses in the West this month. The latest horses killed had come from a broker who obtained them from a Native American tribe in South Dakota. The department is also investigating this month's sale of six wild horses to an Oklahoma man and their slaughter.
Well, that didn’t take long……..and neither did this……
April 27, 2005- A coalition of celebrities, race track leaders and others is pressing for action on legislation that would end or limit the slaughter of wild horses Lawmakers have tried for years to stop the killing of wild horses and burros at three U.S. slaughterhouses that send the meat for consumption overseas. The effort gained momentum last year after Congress replaced a 34-year-old ban on selling wild mustangs and burros with a plan that allows the sale of older, unwanted horses.
I just have to comment on this……If the lawmakers have been trying for years to stop the sale of wild horses to slaughterhouses just what was the 34 year old ban Congress repealed last year banning for “ALL THOSE YEARS”???
And on with the, if a little is good a lot is better idea……
One current proposal would stop the commercial sale of wild horses and burros. A second measure would ban the slaughter of horses in the United States. "When you've got a coalition ranging from (country singer) Willie Nelson to ("Desperate Housewives' star) Nicollette Sheridan, we've got something for everyone," said Nancy Perry, the Humane Society of the United States' vice president of government affairs.
Well, not everyone but who’s really listening to those who have any stake in livestock marketing or production these days anyway? She meant they have something for everyone who is anyone…….
April 27, 2005 - The recent slaughter of wild horses sold by the federal government should give momentum to new legislation that would halt the killing of animals that many consider to be an icon of the American West, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said. Nevada has the most wild horses of any state, roughly 19,000, according to the Bureau of Land Management. That's more than half of roughly 37,000 total in the West, according to the BLM's February 2004 estimate. Ensign next month plans to introduce a bill that would ban slaughter of horses for human consumption, Ensign said. A similar bill has been introduced in the House. "The love affair that I have with horses is the same as a lot of Americans have had since the beginning of this country," said Ensign, a veterinarian who as a boy rode horses in the Lake Tahoe meadow where the opening credits of the longtime television show "Bonanza" were filmed. The Humane Society of the United States has been flooded with calls, pleading with the group to save the wild horses, said Nancy Perry, vice president of governmental affairs. "This has been an un-American experience these last few weeks, few months," Perry said today. "Our deep concern has turned to outrage and frustration."
May 19, 2005, The federal Bureau of Land Management will announce Thursday it is resuming sales of wild horses with protections to prevent the animals from being sent to slaughter, the agency's director said Wednesday. The agency suspended the sales last month after discovering that 41 animals rounded up from Western rangeland had been sold to an Illinois slaughterhouse and processed for meat. In addition, Ford Motor Co. will pay to transport up to 2,000 horses to Indian reservations and locations run by non-profit organizations. The company will also oversee a "Save the Mustangs" fundraising drive to help groups that adopt the horses pay for their care. Wild horses are "a beautiful symbol of the Wild West" and an "icon" for Ford, said Jon Harmon, a spokesman for the company whose Mustang sports car has been a flagship brand since 1964.
Psst…..It was the Sioux who sold 35 of the 41 to slaughter remember?????
Anywayyyyyy…….
May 20, 2005, House lawmakers voted Thursday to end federal wild horse sales and brushed aside promises of new protections the government put in place this week to prevent animals from being resold for slaughter. A 22-minute debate pitted gruesome images of horses butchered to make a buck against horses left to starve on public lands or penned up in government corrals. "The very notion that the wild American horse will be slaughtered as a food source for foreign gourmets has struck a chord with the American people," said Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., who proposed the sales be ended. The vote was seen as a victory for animal welfare activists. But it might not last long. When the amendment reaches the Senate, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., plans "to throw it out." "I'm in the livestock business, and I've bought and sold horses all my life," Burns said Thursday. "Basically, the marketplace works."
Well, may not so much in this case……..
May 29, 2005, The Senate must have been horsing around last year while Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., slipped a dubious provision lifting the 1971 ban on sales of wild horses into a spending bill. After it was discovered that the sales sent 41 horses to the slaughterhouse, the House voted this month to reinstate the ban, which can be supported on solid grounds. First, there are only 27,000 wild horses and 4,000 wild burros on government land in Western states. Allowing the sale of these animals could endanger the species.
Six months ago they were whining about the increase in the budget to keep the overrun they had in holding pens. Are they “endangered” or hoofed rats which are overrunning the range and costing the taxpayers to feed????? Guess that 10,000 head (lost?) between April 27, 2005 and May 29, 2005 made a BIG DIFFERENCE.
But that was solved in the same debate……. (and this really hurts because I love my Ford trucks)
A compromise could be reached if philanthropists follow the lead of Ford Motor Co., which has set up a donation fund to save these horses. Such action could ease the concerns ranchers have for securing their lands and taxpayers may have with the costly price tag of protecting wild horses.
Now that doesn’t exactly mean will and did but……you get the idea.
June 9, 2005 - The House agreed to ban federal funding for inspectors at horse slaughterhouses and border inspection sites on Wednesday, adding another potential layer of protection for the Nevada's wild horse population. Last month the House agreed to ban the Bureau of Land Management sales of wild horses after the government discovered dozens had been bought and then resold to slaughterhouses that sold the meat to foreign countries. Sales have resumed, unless the Senate agrees to the same ban, but the BLM has implemented stricter guidelines and consequences for those who buy horses and do not intend to care for them. But Wednesday's amendment, approved 269 to 158, offered by Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., and Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y., aims to end horse slaughter for human consumption overall.
And tying it all up in a neat little bow……
June 25, 2005 - Horse protection advocates said Tuesday that they'll oppose a proposal aimed at boosting adoptions of wild horses unless Congress also bans the slaughter of any horses in the U.S. Leaders of the Humane Society of the United States and other groups said they favor part of the proposal introduced by Nevada's entire congressional delegation Monday to impose a one-year waiting period on the transfer of ownership for wild horses sold through a relatively new sale program at the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. But they said other provisions in the bill would undermine protections for the mustangs unless the bill is accompanied by the slaughter ban, which has passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
And as the old saying goes the rest is history…….it and lots more of the Catch 22 that is the BLM Mustang Management is available at "http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/"
R.H 1
I came into the business end of horses during the crash of the 80s. The wide spread liquidation of horses. I watched own sons and daughters of household names go to kill. It was a nearly a decade of farm dispersals, and loaded semis. Here is how it all looked statistically. Incidentally
1980 total number of horses slaughtered 274,500
1981 total number of horses slaughtered 219,300
1982 total number of horses slaughtered 149,600
1983 total number of horses slaughtered 398,500
1984 total number of horses slaughtered 105,300
1985 total number of horses slaughtered 128,300
1986 total number of horses slaughtered 202,100
1987 total number of horses slaughtered 275,700
1988 total number of horses slaughtered 331,000
1989 total number of horses slaughtered 348,400
1990 total number of horses slaughtered 345,700
1991 total number of horses slaughtered 276,900
1992 total number of horses slaughtered 246,400
1993 total number of horses slaughtered 167,310
The total number of horses slaughtered per year leveled off and declined after 1995 to around 100,000 or less.
I think this is probably what caused the lack of unwanted horses in the 90s Alex Brown was referring to in his article stating we could get along without slaughter. Well, yes we nearly did for a few years in the later 90s. We were down to killing only around 50 to 60 thousand head a year.
I was selling horses throughout the 90s and it was very, very good for quite a few years. Kind of thought it might be the reward for those who did manage to survive the 80s. The economy was going well, the liquidation of horses had caused a shortage of the good kind, people could now afford to anti up for something nice and nice was kind of scarce. Point is the good economy and the shortage of horses was responsible for the lack of unwanted horses AND the lower slaughter numbers. Not the lower slaughter number……….so on……..
Why didn’t this mass liquidation of horses trigger full court press for congress to change the laws back then? Why now?
Now even traditional meat animal agriculture is studying the effect of an animal’s comfort and humane treatment on carcass quality. Most livestock production associations have implemented their own quality control, packer incentive programs, and fund research programs. A fascinating person who has contributed greatly to these programs and has done studies on horse slaughter is Temple Grandin please refer to her web site and some very interesting reading. "http://www.templegrandin.com/templehome.html" She also kind of shoots down the “uncaring, unscientific, educationally challenged” animal ag stereotype being pushed around the anti-slaughter sites these days so they prefer not to mention her. If the plants were ever going to become more humane for traditional meat animals or horses it is more likely to happen now than during the bloodbath liquidation of the 80s and early 90s.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has published a final rule Dec. 7, 2001 that establishes minimum standards to ensure the humane movement of equines to slaughtering facilities by way of commercial transportation. These regulations address food, water and rest provided to animals. Owner and shippers of horses are required to take certain actions in loading and transporting the animals, and they must certify that the commercial transportation meets certain requirements. In addition, the regulations prohibit the commercial transportation to slaughtering facilities of horses considered to be unfit for travel, the use of electric prods and, within five years, the use of double-deck trailers. The number of double-deck trailers has been reduced in the last few years, being replaced with single-deck trailers.
This was taken from Web site: "http://www.animalagriculture.org/" inaugural issue of The Equine Heath Report which came out in January 2002.
Even those horrible double deck trailers were going to be phased out by the 2007. This ruling became law in Feb 2002. But even with this ruling in place an APHIS prosecuting violators there was a rush to Congress in 2005. Why now?
41 mustangs, 41 mustangs were sold to slaughter. But first Washington had to get its collective butt in a sling. Bear with me because this is going to get interesting. At least it did to me. I have thought all along the lawmakers in D.C. could care less about the actual horses or people involved with them. This issue has been a sell-out to curry favor among the urban/wall street/celebrity factors who so generously contribute to campaign funds. Here is the not so pretty little industry of no consequence we can do away to make us look good.
The really ironic part of all this…..
I didn’t set out to research this subject or the connection. I was looking for something else entirely but I found…….. a little of the Why now?
April 30, 2004, swimming in a sea of red ink (I think we still are) Lawmakers are skeptical of the Bureau of Land Management's proposal to increase the amount of money spent on wild horse and burro management. Western Republican lawmakers and BLM officials say the populations of wild horses and burros need to decrease. Environmental groups say the agency should reduce the numbers of domestic livestock that, like the wild horses and burros, graze on federal lands. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., chairman of the Senate panel that has jurisdiction over the BLM's budget, is concerned about the agency's proposal. "I think what we should do is put some language in this thing that allows the BLM to sell excess wild horses," Burns said. "I'd prefer to sell 'em to whomever. Maybe some of them will end up going to slaughter."
November 24, 2004, In a reversal of three decades of government policy that protected all wild horses, a provision approved by Congress last weekend would allow some of them to be sold to slaughterhouses. The provision, attached to an omnibus spending bill by Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana and chairman of the appropriations subcommittee with responsibility for the Interior Department, requires the sale of wild horses that have been rounded up and are more than 10 years old or have been unsuccessfully offered for adoption three times.
(The Three Strikes rule)
March 21, 2005, The federal Bureau of Land Management says it is selling wild horses to American Indian tribes for the first time. The BLM has sold 141 horses to the Rosebud Sioux in South Dakota and 120 horses to the Three Affiliated Tribes in North Dakota. More sales are planned in the next several weeks, bringing the total to more than 500 horses.
April 26, 2005, The Interior Department has abruptly halted delivery of wild mustangs to buyers while it investigates the slaughter of 41 wild horses in the West this month. The latest horses killed had come from a broker who obtained them from a Native American tribe in South Dakota. The department is also investigating this month's sale of six wild horses to an Oklahoma man and their slaughter.
Well, that didn’t take long……..and neither did this……
April 27, 2005- A coalition of celebrities, race track leaders and others is pressing for action on legislation that would end or limit the slaughter of wild horses Lawmakers have tried for years to stop the killing of wild horses and burros at three U.S. slaughterhouses that send the meat for consumption overseas. The effort gained momentum last year after Congress replaced a 34-year-old ban on selling wild mustangs and burros with a plan that allows the sale of older, unwanted horses.
I just have to comment on this……If the lawmakers have been trying for years to stop the sale of wild horses to slaughterhouses just what was the 34 year old ban Congress repealed last year banning for “ALL THOSE YEARS”???
And on with the, if a little is good a lot is better idea……
One current proposal would stop the commercial sale of wild horses and burros. A second measure would ban the slaughter of horses in the United States. "When you've got a coalition ranging from (country singer) Willie Nelson to ("Desperate Housewives' star) Nicollette Sheridan, we've got something for everyone," said Nancy Perry, the Humane Society of the United States' vice president of government affairs.
Well, not everyone but who’s really listening to those who have any stake in livestock marketing or production these days anyway? She meant they have something for everyone who is anyone…….
April 27, 2005 - The recent slaughter of wild horses sold by the federal government should give momentum to new legislation that would halt the killing of animals that many consider to be an icon of the American West, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said. Nevada has the most wild horses of any state, roughly 19,000, according to the Bureau of Land Management. That's more than half of roughly 37,000 total in the West, according to the BLM's February 2004 estimate. Ensign next month plans to introduce a bill that would ban slaughter of horses for human consumption, Ensign said. A similar bill has been introduced in the House. "The love affair that I have with horses is the same as a lot of Americans have had since the beginning of this country," said Ensign, a veterinarian who as a boy rode horses in the Lake Tahoe meadow where the opening credits of the longtime television show "Bonanza" were filmed. The Humane Society of the United States has been flooded with calls, pleading with the group to save the wild horses, said Nancy Perry, vice president of governmental affairs. "This has been an un-American experience these last few weeks, few months," Perry said today. "Our deep concern has turned to outrage and frustration."
May 19, 2005, The federal Bureau of Land Management will announce Thursday it is resuming sales of wild horses with protections to prevent the animals from being sent to slaughter, the agency's director said Wednesday. The agency suspended the sales last month after discovering that 41 animals rounded up from Western rangeland had been sold to an Illinois slaughterhouse and processed for meat. In addition, Ford Motor Co. will pay to transport up to 2,000 horses to Indian reservations and locations run by non-profit organizations. The company will also oversee a "Save the Mustangs" fundraising drive to help groups that adopt the horses pay for their care. Wild horses are "a beautiful symbol of the Wild West" and an "icon" for Ford, said Jon Harmon, a spokesman for the company whose Mustang sports car has been a flagship brand since 1964.
Psst…..It was the Sioux who sold 35 of the 41 to slaughter remember?????
Anywayyyyyy…….
May 20, 2005, House lawmakers voted Thursday to end federal wild horse sales and brushed aside promises of new protections the government put in place this week to prevent animals from being resold for slaughter. A 22-minute debate pitted gruesome images of horses butchered to make a buck against horses left to starve on public lands or penned up in government corrals. "The very notion that the wild American horse will be slaughtered as a food source for foreign gourmets has struck a chord with the American people," said Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., who proposed the sales be ended. The vote was seen as a victory for animal welfare activists. But it might not last long. When the amendment reaches the Senate, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., plans "to throw it out." "I'm in the livestock business, and I've bought and sold horses all my life," Burns said Thursday. "Basically, the marketplace works."
Well, may not so much in this case……..
May 29, 2005, The Senate must have been horsing around last year while Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., slipped a dubious provision lifting the 1971 ban on sales of wild horses into a spending bill. After it was discovered that the sales sent 41 horses to the slaughterhouse, the House voted this month to reinstate the ban, which can be supported on solid grounds. First, there are only 27,000 wild horses and 4,000 wild burros on government land in Western states. Allowing the sale of these animals could endanger the species.
Six months ago they were whining about the increase in the budget to keep the overrun they had in holding pens. Are they “endangered” or hoofed rats which are overrunning the range and costing the taxpayers to feed????? Guess that 10,000 head (lost?) between April 27, 2005 and May 29, 2005 made a BIG DIFFERENCE.
But that was solved in the same debate……. (and this really hurts because I love my Ford trucks)
A compromise could be reached if philanthropists follow the lead of Ford Motor Co., which has set up a donation fund to save these horses. Such action could ease the concerns ranchers have for securing their lands and taxpayers may have with the costly price tag of protecting wild horses.
Now that doesn’t exactly mean will and did but……you get the idea.
June 9, 2005 - The House agreed to ban federal funding for inspectors at horse slaughterhouses and border inspection sites on Wednesday, adding another potential layer of protection for the Nevada's wild horse population. Last month the House agreed to ban the Bureau of Land Management sales of wild horses after the government discovered dozens had been bought and then resold to slaughterhouses that sold the meat to foreign countries. Sales have resumed, unless the Senate agrees to the same ban, but the BLM has implemented stricter guidelines and consequences for those who buy horses and do not intend to care for them. But Wednesday's amendment, approved 269 to 158, offered by Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., and Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y., aims to end horse slaughter for human consumption overall.
And tying it all up in a neat little bow……
June 25, 2005 - Horse protection advocates said Tuesday that they'll oppose a proposal aimed at boosting adoptions of wild horses unless Congress also bans the slaughter of any horses in the U.S. Leaders of the Humane Society of the United States and other groups said they favor part of the proposal introduced by Nevada's entire congressional delegation Monday to impose a one-year waiting period on the transfer of ownership for wild horses sold through a relatively new sale program at the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. But they said other provisions in the bill would undermine protections for the mustangs unless the bill is accompanied by the slaughter ban, which has passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
And as the old saying goes the rest is history…….it and lots more of the Catch 22 that is the BLM Mustang Management is available at "http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/"
R.H 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
