Kudos to Craig DiBenedictis for his outstanding editorial, "The case against equine slaughter"  featured in the Sept 2009 issue of Equus Magazine.  Finally, a major horse magazine such as Equus has the courage to print the truth about horse slaughter!  Mr. DiBenedictis' article reflects the sentiments of the majority of Americans and American horse owners.  Thank you for being the voice of so many of us who are fighting to stop this tragedy, and for our American horses who continue to suffer the brutality that is horse slaughter.  Horse slaughter needs to end, now.

Being a horse owner for over 30 years, I can empathize with those who feel slaughter is inhumane. However has anyone looked into the treatment of any animal slaughtered? Cattle, swine, chickens,etc are all euthanized at the slaughter plants the same way the horses are, yet no one says anything about them, or thinks twice about eating that cheeseburger or bacon. I am pro slaughter in the US for the simple reason it is much easier to regulate how the animals are taken care of at the plants here, than some other country elsewhere. Thousands of dogs and cats are put down every year, even though nothing is wrong with them, how is it we feel horses shouldn't be as well. As far as the people who unknowingly sell their animals to meat men at low end sales, these people either need to admit to the truth they are in denial of knowing, or educate themselves about the type of sale they are taking their horse to. The problem with horse slaughter is the fact we have humanized our horses, and have moved away from the fact they are first and foremost an animal, and despite the fact they are such a noble animal, there are people who love their cows, and pigs, and any other animal out there the same way, yet not much is ever written about that. As far as what is seen on the internet, anything can be shown in a bad light depending on who edits or puts the video out there. Animals at rodeos are portrayed as being neglected and mistreated, yet I know from first hand acct that these animals are often treated better than any high end race horse. Mr Dibenedictis wants to start a fund and I ask him with what. Our country is in the worst deficit in years, people are losing their homes at an alarming rate, the choice between food or medicine is very real for many of us as well. A fund would be great but at whose expense? And what is to be done with the very dangerous horses? Should we call all the "horse whisperers" ? How about the ones who are beyond what medicine can fix? Where should the excess be buried then?  It seems to me he is very close minded to the people who have no problem eating one of God's creatures. Maybe he should be preaching to those who breed unregistered and low quality animals for the sake of making fifty dollars on a stud fee, and do nothing but flood the market with horses whose value dollar wise is not comparable to the higher end breeding stock. I know my opinion will no doubt horrify people who read this, but this is the beauty of living in the Us, you are entitled to free speech. And for those of you who complain and say how horrible horse slaughter is, get away from your desk and get off the couch and do something to help solve the problem, because nothing is ever resolved without hard work.

If I'm not mistaken, the essayist is the Rev. Craig DiBenedictis. 

Good thing the gospels have obsolesced animal sacrifice.  Otherwise, it would be awfully difficulty to reconcile animal sacrifice with a vegetarian lifestyle.  Of course, the resurrected Lord did prepare a barbeque of fish on the beach for His disciples after they successfully landed a net full of fish.

To each his own, eh?

"Everything God has created is good, and no food is to 'be rejected, provided if is received with thanksgiving: the word of God and prayer make it holy

Although the old testament makes references to which animals with split hooves were to be considered clean or unclean the horse was not mentioned either way. In the new testament it veers quite radically from the previous laws."Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." (Genesis 9:3, NIV)

BOSSGEE:

In the new (old?) testament  ... (Genesis 9:3, NIV)

Slavery and Prohibition were lobbied on moral grounds.  Slavery ended while Prohibition is history.

It seems the authority of the Bible can be quoted by both pro and anti horse slaughter camps.  So whoever gets more converts, by majority rule, makes the laws.  It's when the minority tries to shove it to the majority that legislation gets repealed.

In Chicago, we owned a three-flat apartment close to a 24-flat owned by Hindus.  Most of the residents were Hindus.  The apartment complex had a serious pest control problem.  The non-Hindu tenants brought numerous complaints to the Housing Authorities.  The CHA mandated extermination on a regular and frequent basis. 

On one occasion, I had a chance to ask my fellow landlord, why he had such a pest control problem.  His answer (as best as I can remember), "You wouldn't want to step on your grandmother, would you?"  Meaning, the belief in reincarnation made the Hindu tenants more tolerant of coachroaches.

The best thing the non-Hindu tenants could do was move out.

Well put!!!!  I agree with everything you said about this article. 

This was a very well written article.  Mr. DiBenedictis has obviously done his research.  The people who profit from the slaughter of horses will always argue that slaughter is a necessary evil.

We cannot compare the slaughter of cattle, sheep, swine, fowl and horses because these other animals are raised for FOOD.  I am certain they suffer just as much as horses do if not more, but good luck trying to pass a law banning the slaughter of these animals.  There is just too much money and power in the beef industry alone.

And in what kind of "lighting" can a horse appear to be missing a leg or appear to have flesh ripped from its sides??

If people have the opinion that it's ok to slaughter/eat horses, then maybe they shouldn't own horses.   Are you the same people who believe it's ok to eat dogs and cats? That no animal should be exempt from slaughter?

And WHY bring religion into this and the bible??  Even though Mr. DiBenedictis is a pastor, he never brought up religion in his article.  This is not an article about religion or politics; leave it out of this forum.

This was an awesome article!  I am so pleased that Equus magazine printed it.  Thank you Equus!

I believe that horse slaughter is wrong. Unfortunately, not everyone will agree. Some people think it is OK to abuse their children, so it does not surprise me that there are those that don't have a problem with equine slaughter. I was appalled when I saw a pro-slaughter group on Facebook. Many members having photos of horses as their profile picture. How can you love horses and think that this is OK for them?

In the US, we do not raise horses for meat consumption. We really don't even raise them for "work" anymore either. They are pets, friends, team mates, family to most. To some they are just a way of making money. I do not think that horse slaughter is wrong because of any religious beliefs. It just has no place in our society or culture.

We do slaughter other animals in the US. If you watch HBO's Real Sports episode about the dark side of horse racing, you will see the dark side of horse slaughter. They show that horses are much harder to slaughter than cows because of the wide range of motion that horses have in their necks. It may take several attempts. Horses shipped to other countries (especially Mexico) do suffer much harsher fates, with even more inhumane methods of slaughter. I am not sure that equine slaughter can be humane. I know that some will argue this point, but I also read an article in an Arizona newspaper the other day where people were arguing that horse tripping was humane. Weird...

Euthanasia should not be compared with slaughter. I wish that it only had to happen to end suffering, but it is a more humane way to deal with overpopulation. Oprah had an episode on animal shelters where she showed a dog being euthanized. The dog appeared to go to sleep. He did not die violently, scared, in a pool of his own blood.

We need to try to stop over breeding horses to bring the population down. Slaughter is not the answer.

One thing people can "get off the couch" and do is donate to a horse rescue. Economic hardship is upon us, but even the smallest amounts can help. As mentioned in the About the author section of the article ReRun is a very good horse rescue helping OTTBs. People can also donate to their local humane society.

DiBenedictis raises important issues, but I believe these must be examined each independently, rather than in the conflated manner employed in this editorial.

First, yes- there will always be people who abuse animals, whether through ignorance or willful action. DiBenedictis sites statistics that indicate abuse is on the rise. However, as in my own field (human medicine), statistics must be placed in context. It could well be that the statistics on abuse are rising as the public's consciousness has been changed to prompt reporting rather than ignoring that boney horse down the highway. This deserves real consideration, as it is unlikely that the number of cruel or ignorant people has actually risen in this short period of time.

Next, inadequate enforcement of existing anti-cruelty laws has been responsible for many of the heinous instances of animals injured during transportation, as well as 'downed' animals being sold and processed at slaughter houses. As Temple Grandin has shown in her work with beef cattle, slaughter facilities can be designed to induce little stress on the animals. Slaughter is not inherently cruel.

The economics of the horse market and the wider financial crisis in the world must be considered- the family that could afford a horse for the kids 10 years ago, may not be able to afford this now. I am middle aged and my father bought and sold horses my entire childhood. I have kept horses my whole life and I have personally witness similar downturns in the horse market several times. For most of us, horses are a luxury, not a necessity. Therefore, the horse out in the yard or at the local stable is one of the first targets when people must cut back on expenses. My dear childhood pony was the victim of such a situation- we bought him from a family that couldn't feed him and had turned him out on a tree lot, where he had survived for months on the bark of the trees. DiBenedictis suggests that the horse community develop a mechanism to support those folks who can't afford to feed their horses. This is a lovely sentiment, but that assumes that there is a community. Outside of established stables, this is rarely so. My experience of horse people is that there is a good deal of stratification. Those who could best afford such contributions on a regular basis are less likely than most to feel a real connection with their animals as they hire out the daily care and training.

Out here in the real world, the rescues are filled up. DiBenedictis suggests rescues are the answer, but rescue operators must secure property, feed, veterinary care, and human power to provide routine care. None of this is cheap. Some of us are currently doing our part, in our own small way, to help the neglected and unwanted animals. I have 2 horses that are absolute rescues. One I actually bought, although at the time he was so weak I really doubted that he would survive the trailer ride home. He did survive and after 9 years, he continues on, with a special diet as he is so old his molars have been missing for years. The other I just acquired for 'free'. Of course, there was the initial expense (and time) of trailering 140 miles just to get her home. She has been foundered, and has some bad habits, but might actually make a suitable mount for light duty with the grandkids. I am now officially filled up. Until one of the current tenants here passes on, I have no room for another. It is important to remember that many 'rescues' cannot be placed anywhere, and will need support for the rest of their lives, which can be many years.

DiBenedictis rightly points out that irresponsible breeding accounts for a surplus that cannot be supported, at least in our current economy. However, just as with dogs and cats, restricting breeding is very difficult. We haven't succeeded with dogs and cats, even though licensing laws are in place for those animals. When an owner realizes they are in over their heads with the number or type of horses they have, it is much harder to dispose of that unwanted horse than it is to dispose of a dog or cat, which can be put in the family car and driven to the local shelter. Slaughter has long be one option in this kind of situation.

While personal feelings about eating horsemeat are valid, there is no nutritional reason not to. DiBenedictus seemingly approves of consuming beef and pork. Perhaps he would feel differently if he had ever milked a cow twice a day, or worked the ground with a yoke of oxen. If he had ever taught a pig to do tricks, that might also sway his opinion. However, these are just opinions, not national values, as was implied in this editorial. I personally would be hard pressed to eat one of my horses, but could not rule it out if it was a matter of survival for me or my family. This is a very important debate, and while personal feelings are important, we must take care in letting them unduly influence national policy.

 Respectfully,

CJ Ewell

Altamont UT

While I hope that the slaughter of American horses will be banned via HR503 and S.727, even if it does not, horse slaughter will not continue haphazardly as it has in the past.  Was it regulated when US plants were open?  I would hardly call it that.  Concern for food safety has prompted the EU, a primary end user of US sourced horse meat, to issue a mandate that US horses destined for food consumption will have to be issued passports as they already are doing in the UK, documenting that the horse has been designated for slaughter and that all medications, treatments, etc must be certified.  Horses of questionable background will have to be held for 6 months on feed lots, during which time prohibited substances cannot be administered to treat illness or injury.  Can you imagine?  A feed lot full of horses from a variety of sources likely to come down with flu, pneumonia, strangles, etc which can't be treated (or start the 6 month period over again) - now doesn't that sound appetizing?  Did you know, the horse slaughter industry has a slogan, "stable to table in 7 days."  I guess they will have to change their slogan starting in April 2010, the deadline for US compliance with EU standards.  I believe this is an EU attempt to safeguard their source of US horsemeat rather than face an all out ban.

As you may be aware, many medications, including dewormers and phenylbutazone, are commonly given to horses in the US as they are not bred and raised as food animals, and for which there is NO withdrawal period.  If phenylbutazone alone has ever been given to a horse, it will automatically become ineligible for slaughter.  People often tend to forget that animals bred and raised for food consumption (i.e. cattle, pigs, chickens in the US) have rigorous controls over what substances are permitted to be administered, and there are withdrawal times for those that are permissable. 

There are many reasons for not consuming the meat of pet animals, such as horses or dogs, food safety being one of them.  In the US, we do not even use horse meat in pet food any longer.  Ivermectin, a dewormer commonly given to horses, can be deadly to dogs, for instance.  In fact, in the Sept 2009 issue of Equus, Sharon Gwaltney-Brant, DVM, PhD, vice president and medical director ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center, states that dogs ingesting as little as 3 gms of horse manure within 2.5 days of deworming can suffer toxicocity, and residues persist in the manure after 9 days.  If it's still in the manure, I would think that chances are it's in other bodily tissues as well. 

Remember the melamine contaminated food products from China?  Serious stuff.  Imagine the US producing a questionable food product at best, which we don't ourselves consume, but have the audacity to market in other countries as safe.  The horse slaughter industry has continued because it has been profitable for a greedy few from the lowest end of the horse industry.  Not too surprising the slaughter industry has not been too concerned with human welfare, either.  I have to agree with Mr. DeBenedictis that until horse slaughter is banned, and we are forced to come up with alternative solutions, there is little incentive for those who don't want to do right by their horses to change.  As it is, they are getting paid for dumping slaughter bound horses.  When there is no longer a financial reward for being irresponsible, they will no longer be able to hide behind animal neglect and abuse and get compensated for same.  Animal abuse is a crime.  Those who commit crimes need to face the consequences of their actions, not receive financial gain from it.   I also agree that horse slaughter is NOT about horse welfare, it's a profit-for-kill driven industry that preys on our pets and companions, show and race horses, therapy and law enforcement horses - who have been taught to trust, obey and serve mankind.  I personally can't think of a greater betrayal to this noble species than to cruelly slaughter them. 

For more information regarding horse slaughter:

http://www.vickitobin.com/index.html

http://www.kaufmanzoning.net/

List of medications prohibited in horses destined for human consumtion:

http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/prohibited-drugs.php

Mousemistresz:  I love you!  I hope Equus prints your comments!  Keep posting!  No one can argue w/ you :-)  You have covered all the bases!  I doubt most of our fellow horse people are even aware that slaughter bound horses must be kept for 6 months to rid them of all meds, dewormers, etc.  We have been arguing for years that we put so many poisons into our horses; who would want to eat them?!  Horses are not a food animals and are not raised as such in the USA.

Thanks for mentioning CANTER and the work they are doing.   CANTER does an absolutely phenominal job of helping to transition racehorses into new careers and homes when their racing days are complete.  There are so many programs like this available; no horse should ever have to go to slaughter as there are plenty of alternative options for horse owners to pursue.  The majority of horses owners are responsible and will do the right thing by their horses, but there are always the few who choose to be irresponsible and/or lack compassion for their equine friends.  It is these horses who, through no fault of their own, need our protection.  They aren't so much unwanted, as they are unlucky.

For those in the market for a new horse, please consider an OTTB for your future partner.  They are intelligent, friendly, athletic and versatile.  Most are very people-oriented type horses, eager to please and highly trainable to do almost anything.  My husband and I have adopted 6 OTTBs and they have all made fabulous trail horses.  We also work privately to help find homes for horses of all breeds.      

Here is the CANTER web-site, where you can browse both CANTER and trainer listings of available horses:

You are correct in that we've been making the argument for years that horse meat is unsafe in the way it is obtained here in the US, but the pro-slaughter folks have just as long been in denial.  With the latest EU ruling, they can no longer deny the facts of what we've been saying all along.  Thanks for your support :)

mousemistresz:

There are many reasons for not consuming the meat of pet animals, such as horses or dogs, food safety being one of them.  In the US, we do not even use horse meat in pet food any longer.  Ivermectin, a dewormer commonly given to horses, can be deadly to dogs, for instance.  In fact, in the Sept 2009 issue of Equus, Sharon Gwaltney-Brant, DVM, PhD, vice president and medical director ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center, states that dogs ingesting as little as 3 gms of horse manure within 2.5 days of deworming can suffer toxicocity, and residues persist in the manure after 9 days.  If it's still in the manure, I would think that chances are it's in other bodily tissues as well. 

Very good tactic!  We obviously have no problems having Europeans or Asians eat their own horses.

Why is that?  Why just save lucky American horses?  Sounds racist, doesn't it?

The real problem is we have 10,000,000+ horses!  And, we can't afford them all.  Hence the world comes to our neighbors to the north and south to stake a claim on our unwanted resources.  It's like, "If you over breed them, they will come to eat them (or feed them to their dogs and cats)."  So now there are States that are passing legislation to open horse slaughters as a means of recycling our over abundant resource. 

If not, then we are bound to have a serious disposal problem.  Humm, I'm thinking of resurrecting an old business plan for a mobile crematorium.  Estimating 100,000 cremations a year at $800 each ... is $80,000,000 of gross income.  What I should campaign for is a $1,000 bond on each horse for its ultimate disposal.  Well there you go folks!  The basics of business success, find a need and legislate it!

By the way, whoever lets a dog eat horse poop, specially within 2.5 days of deworming, ought to be indicted.  Why is the dog eating horse poop in the first place?