Gypsy:  Why are you even subscribing to a horse magazine if you don't share a "love" of horses?  Because we as humans have made a mistake w/ over breeding, or for financial reasons, etc, it becomes the horses' faults?  They have to be punished for a mistake WE made?  hmmmmm  Seems fair.  I guess as Americans it is always someone else's fault. When will we take responsibilty for our mistakes?  What is so wrong with trying to find a humane solution to end unwanted horses' suffering?  Why are you fighting people who are only trying to help the horses who have no voices of their own?? Why are you not trying to find a solution?  It seems you have all the answers!  Sending the horses to slaughter is the coward/lazy/easiest way out ---  you must fall into this category.  We cannot control what other countries do with their animals - you know that.  Doesn't mean that we think it is ok for THEM to slaughter and eat horses.  But we CAN control what happens to horses in THIS country!  We as humans DO have a voice!

Maybe you should find a different pet.

Oh... but heaven forbid someone lets their DOG eat horse poop!   Indict them?? lol  Who would take care of the horsies??  We'd all be in jail!

Mousemistresz:  Keep up the good work!  I am with you 100%

As unappetizing as it is to us, almost any dog will eat poop, both dog and other species, given the chance.  I'm not sure why they do it, but can only assume there is a reason perhaps known only to them.  Many farms have dogs that are either loose at least part of the time or actually are working dogs that have easy access to manure.  I'd guess most people never thought about the horse manure being toxic after deworming.  The point was that if it's still in the poop, it has to be coming from somewhere in the body, in the meat we are marketing to other countries as safe.  It's just wrong and reckless to jeopardize the health of others in this manner, no matter what your personal stance on horse slaughter may be.

Not being able to afford a horse is not justification for slaughtering it.  People can't afford their dogs and cats, they either find a new home or worst case take them to a vet or shelter for humane euthanasia.  Horse slaughter is not to be equated with humane euthanasia, it's been proven over and over again via FOIAs and investigations.  Yet you don't want to consider any other options although there are many.  If a person isn't willing to make responsible end-of-life decisions for a pet, DON'T OWN ONE in the first place.  Problem will take care of itself once slaughter is no longer available and those few who choose to be irresponsible will no longer be paid for it.  We have too many horses BECAUSE there is a meat market for them.  It's called greed.

From vickitobin.com:

What will happen to all the unwanted horses? The owners and breeders will have to take responsibility for what they chose to own or breed; what a concept! If the horses were unwanted and had no value, they would be donated to slaughter. The anti-horse advocates invented this term as one of their tactics. A better term would be "used". Like a used pair of shoes that have no value but they want to be paid to dispose of them.

There are many options available and many programs that have been implemented such as prison programs, low cost euthanasia and disposal from local departments of Ag and vet colleges, euthanasia programs at rescues and retirement funds for race horses. One only has to want to avail themselves to available alternatives.

Anti-horse proponents only want one solution - horse slaughter.

You may also want to ask them what happened to all the unwanted horses when the slaughter counts dropped from over 400,000 to under 100,000 in a few short years (this took place in the 1990's). What happened to the 300,000 horses that weren't slaughtered every year? This is another one of the questions that the anti-horse folks won't answer.

We don't slaughter  "unwanted" dogs, and we don't need to slaughter "unwanted" horses.  Is there a dog overbreeding problem?  Yes, but no one suggests we slaughter our way out of it.  Instead, we focus on education, spay & neuter programs, rescue, shelters, etc.  We can and should do the same for horses, who serve similar purposes in our society as the dog.  Horses are not raised for meat production in the US. For far too long it has just been a means for the irresponsible to remain irresponsible, while getting paid for it.  Slaughter does not prevent abuse, neglect, or abandonment - on the contrary, it hides, rewards, and perpetuates cruelty to horses.

cpmcteddy, I agree with everything you said as well - very well stated.  No one is saying we think it's ok for other countries to eat dogs, cats, horses, etc. but there is only so much we can do.  There are folks in those countries fighting for change also, and we can support their efforts.  For example, I support ending the baby seal hunts in Canada.  Some countries are putting pressure to stop this by banning imports of seal fur and seal fur products.  It is starting to have an impact as the market dwindles.  I foresee the same with US horses now that the end consumers are becoming more and more aware that it's not the pristine product it was presented to be.  Look what happened to our beef industry after ONE cow tested positive for BSE.....

It seems almost as if the anti-horse folks have some sort of tunnel vision where they can't (or won't) entertain any alternatives to the "unwanted" horse issue other than slaughter.  Thankfully they are in the minority on this issue, but have fairly successfully used scare tactics, propraganda and disinformation to woo the unknowing into their web of deceit.  Kinda scary...  We are in the midst of a recession and just like in other times of hardship, there are those who view it as an opportunity to prey on and profit from the misfortune of others.  Very sad really.  

I think if people witnessed a horse being slaughtered, they would realize there is nothing "humane" about it.  Out of sight, out of mind.  They don't have to do the actual killing and they can talk themselves into believing it is for the good of the horse.  Horses work most of their lives, whether it be a trail horse, a race horse, jumper, cow horse....  they give so much to us and they deserve to have a decent, quiet death.  But, what can we expect from a throw away nation?

I just read this article and so appreciate the way DiBenedictis answered questions I had in my own mind. As a new horse owner and general lover of animals, I was plagued with distress over this issue. I could see both sides of the debate and wondered what the solution to the problem was. I always felt that slaughter was wrong, but wondered if I was being idealistic. Yes, the answer to me was that people should be responsible for their animals. But was that too far fetched in today's society? 

 The particular information regarding cruelty, that people who would be cruel, WILL be cruel. No change in slaughter house legislation is going to change that. On the flip side, kind compassionate people will continue to be such. They would not even consider sending their beloved horse to become steak, just like we don't consider doing the same for precious Fido after he's outlived his usefulness, or for that matter, Grandpa might taste good to someone in some far-off place, as long as we don't know where...Right?

It's starting to sound like a Soylent Green movie. Ewwwe

But jokes aside, what I wanted to say was that I understand this is a touchy subject for many with different sides to consider. I'm just very glad that I've come to a conclusion, one I can live with and promote 100% as being the right decision for my own personal stand, for the good and proper way to treat our most precious companions.

 The issue of necessity being the mother of invention and that help would not come for people who need it if there was always an easy way out makes good sense to me. 

One of the big issues for me was the question I asked myself. Does an animal's intelligence dictate whether they become food or pet and thereby destined for slaughter? I couldn't quiet the issue of why we fight for the non-slaughter of only one animal. Many people love their pet pigs, or cows, or chickens. I guess what I came to was that food industry animals were kept as such, they weren't bred to be our trained, beloved, compainions and then we decide to eat them later when we are done with them. Also, there are agencies that fight for humane treatment of cows, pigs, chickens etc. Even while these animals are serving their purpose of being food, they should be treated humanely. Not tortured or made to suffer horribly. 

Anyway, I thought it was a great article and hopefully it will really make people thing twice about the reasons they support slaughter. I for one and going to keep this article's key point in my mind and email everyone I know.

Thanks!

cpmcteddy:

someone lets their DOG eat horse poop!   Indict them?? lol

Sorry, I meant TOXIC horse poop. 

A dumpster diver in one of the suburbs of Portland is suspected of poisoning yappy dogs who infringe on his stated avocation.  I doubt this is a laughing matter. 

By the same light, sickening ones own dog due to carelessness ... isn't that neglect?

Anyway, here's what we do.  First, we keep our dog well fed.  When deworming, we stall our horses until all the toxic poop passes.  Stabling keeps the dog out and also helps in collecting samples for lab work if necessary.

I'm somewhat pesimistic about the report that Ivermectin alone in horse poop can tox a dog.  In the first place, Ivermectin is used on dogs for the same purpose.  If the dosage left in the poop is overlabel for canines, then left-over Ivermectin would probably give the dog a belly ache.  I thinking it's not just the Ivermectin.  It may be whatever else the worms expel as they react to the dewormer.

I'm sure the good doctor from the ASPCA isn't biased or self-serving.  So I will check it out with our vet when we next meet.  Chalk that claim up for verification, unless collaboration is cited.

It's in the Sept 2009 issue of Equus, in the Equus consultants section under feed-through products.  The person who wrote in was asking whether feed-through poses any danger to dogs eating the poop.  Vet responds the real concern is with dewormers in the avermectin class, such as moxidectin and ivermectin.  It's probably a question of dosage.  With certain medications there is a fine line between therapeutic and toxic levels.  Dogs in the collie family are more susceptible to ivermectin toxicity.

In any case, look at your dewormer package where it states "not to be used in food animals."  A drug that is safe for one species is not necessarily safe for another.  For example, cats and tylenol.

Yep, I read that, too. 

I think some people like to argue just for argument's sake.... geez

This is my first reply to any article!  So bear with me, I am not even sure I am doing this correctly.  I presently own 12 horses, they are my family! I could not imagine eating one.  However, I do believe everything has to die. I have watched and waited with neighbors for the vet to come, only to end the life of a loved one. I have also walked a colic horse for 8 hours at a time, praying that the vet would get here only to end the life. My belief is NOTHING SHOULD HAVE TO SUFFER! I watched in disbelief when the neighbors vet left at 11:00pm and (left enough meds for the PM) because he would return at 7:00 am if the horse was no better. We ran out of meds at 3:00 am and went to everyone we could find to get more meds, just to make him comfortable, until the vet came back at 7:00 am.  When my neighbor called at 7:00 and finally got the vet he said " I HAVE CLINIC DUTY UNITL 12:00 I CAN'T COME OUT UNTIL THEN"  this poor horse suffered even with all the medication we could round up!  So I can say I am PRO SLAUGHTER OR AGAINST SLAUGHTER......................... WHAT I AM AGAINST IS THE WAY THIS HORSES ARE BEING TRANSPORTED TO THEIR FINAL DESTINATION..... I ACTUALLY WITNESSED 16 HORSES ON A 16 FT STOCK TRAILER OFF OF THE INTERSTATE.... THERE WERE HORSES UNDER HORSES BEING STEPPED ON AND A FEW DEAD..... Of course we called the authories, nothing they could do! It would be a State issue. But I would like to know can ANYONE tell me why The Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act was referred to THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY??????????????? WHAT THE HECK DOES THAT MEAN??????????????????

Thanks

Everyone should have their own choice as to what happens to their horse when they no longer are able or want to own it.  The problem is that animal rights groups want us all to view the world as they do.  We will have no choice if they continue to use their propaganda as to what we eat or how we own animals. We all want horses and our other animals to be handled humanely until the time of death.  It has been shown that the chemicals used to put a horse down stay in their tissues and bones for years.  I do not understand why people continue to think this is a great way to put a horse down.  It has its problems just as do other methods.  A bullet to the brain or the captive bolt are much better for the environment and a quick death.  Also once a horse is dead we put 100's of lbs of meat in the ground.  Why would we not use that meat to feed people? People need to be past the pet syndrome and realize that once the horse is a carcass it is no longer their pet.  Let's feed people instead of putting hundreds of thousands of lbs of meat in the ground along with all those chemicals. Yes, let's make sure transportation and the process until time of death is humane for all of our animals. Our ancestors ate horses when they were no longer of any use or had a problem.  People don't want to open their eyes to the fact that people in the U.S. eat horse meat every day.  Let's not let the animal rights groups dictate our lives.  there is a big difference between animal rights and animal welfare--if you don't think so did a little deeper.  I am for animal welfare.

Pat Evans:  Give me a break!  I do not belong to any animal rights groups, yet I don't believe in slaughtering horses because I do NOT believe it is a humane solution to our problem.  Have you ever witnessed a horse being put to death by captive bolt? I bet you haven't.  Don't preach about something you know nothing about.  It is NOT a humane death; horses struggle.  And!!  The people eating the horses are NOT people in third world countries who are starving to death.  This "meat" is going to wealthy Europeans and Asians.  It is a "delicacy".  And I guess you missed the part about all the chemicals and meds that accompany the "meat" as it makes its way overseas.

I had my 23 year old horse "euthanized" by a veterinarian and it was peaceful and gentle, and yep, he went into the ground with all those terrible chemicals (ooo  a whole syringe worth!).  Oh, what a waste!   Well, not really, the bugs got a yummy meal.

Bet you don't think twice about what you put into landfills, huh?

 Please stay away from horses, you don't deserve to own them and they deserve better than your kind.

To Pat Evans and AnimalLover:  are you also pro dog and cat slaughter?  Why or why not?  We euthanize millions of "unwanted" cats and dogs in the US every year.  Why not feed their carcasses to overseas markets and profit from their deaths as well?   This is exactly what is taking place with our horses.

It has been proven that the CBG is not a humane method of euthanasia for a horse.  It was designed for cattle, not horses.  The horse is physically and psychologically different than a cow, making it nearly impossible to comply with the humane slaughter act of 1958 with a horse.  

And here we go with the personal property rights argument again.  No one has the right to be cruel to an animal just because they "own" it.  Horse slaughter is animal cruelty at its worst.

Horse slaughter IS NOT about animal welfare.  It's about a greedy few making a profit from the sale of contaminated horse meat.  It's no surprise that people who care nothing for equine/animal welfare also have little regard for human life.  All you see is dollar signs and stop at nothing to make a buck, even when it includes cruelty to a species which has given us so much, without which we would not be where we are today, and asks for so little in return.  Shame on you.

Yet again I go back to everyone should have their own choice.  It is always interesting that those that want people to have a choice state their comments without aggression or telling someone else they don't know what they are talking about. I actually am very involved in this topic and know much more than you think. It does not matter how much of the drug is given to produce death--it contaminates the entire carcass.  And again I go back to what I said, you should have that choice to put your horse down in this manner. I don't want to dictate what you do.  As far as the animal rights, it is these groups that are behind this push and while you may not be one that does not change the fact.  These groups want everyone to live as they do and see the world as they do.  I hope we never become a people that can't think for themselves and we continue to have options on how we live. Open discussion is great but closed minded people create much of the problem we see today in the world.

Pat,

Sorry, but I will never subscribe to the idea that the freedom of having a "choice" includes the freedom to inflict needless pain and suffering (i.e. cruelty) on another species.  Have you never been the victim of abuse or are you merely a perpetrator?  That is why we have anti-cruelty laws for animals, to protect them from people with attitudes such as yours.  It's why human slavery was abolished in the US despite protesters such as yourself.  It's why domestic violence is no longer being tolerated.  The issue here seems to be that there is disagreement on what constitutes animal cruelty, and what does not.  Michael Vick did not think it was cruel to engage in the sport of dog fighting, while the majority of Americans would disagree.  According to your view, he should have that "choice."  This is the heart of the issue with horse slaughter as well, although there are other issues that need to be considered.  It is simply beyond my comprehension how anyone can view the investigations into horse slaughter, read the reports, watch the videos - and not see it for the cruelty that it is,  Isn't this the definition of "psociopath" - someone who lacks empathy for another lving being, who sees it as an "object" and not something capable of suffering and feeling pain?  The average person would gladly give up this "right" if it meant that horse slaughter would be abolished, just as we give up many other "rights" so that others will not suffer.

Also, how do you reconcile supplying a contaminated food product to our unwary neighbors overseas as being okie dokie?  I can't help but notice that you repeatedly fail to address this issue.  The fact that you see nothing wrong with this alone speaks voumes as to your true character (don't care) and intent (make money).  How is it that you don't see anything wrong with this, yet you have a problem with humane euthanasia by chemical injection for the collective millions of dogs, cats, AND horses every year in the US?  It is estimated that approximately 800,000 of the US horse population die every year; it stands to reason that if 700,000 can be rendered, buried, composted and cremated properly, what is the problem with an additional 100,000 that are currently going to slaughter each year?  The renderers association alone says that they can easily handle an increase of 100,000 horses annually.  For rendering purposes, this is merely a drop in the bucket compared to the number of cows that are euthanized or die of natural causes every year.    

BTW, most pro-horse folks are not animal rights activists, in fact I don't know a single person who is, despite the years I have been involved in this.  Most of us are not even vegetarians, much less vegans.  We do not believe that animals have rights and probably never will, other than the right to humane treatment from humans entrusted with their care.  If the majority of people did not believe this, why then do we have humane laws for animals, including the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958 for animals raised for food purposes, in addition to the Anti-Cruelty Laws for all animals?  We also recognize that in the US it is acceptable to most people that certain animals are purpose raised for food and are not pets, they are or should be subject to regulations concerning proper husbandry and care to ensure humane care and to provide a safe food supply, and are required to be euthanized humanely.  Horses, dogs and cats are not raised for food in the US and perform other functions in our society that livestock generally cannot and do not perform.    

Here is more information and facts regarding humane euthanasia of the horse, and why slaughter cannot be considered a humane method of euthanasia for horses (note this site is sponsored by equine veterinarians, not radical animals rights groups) :

http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/facts.php