HORSE SLAUGHTER

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Sandy S.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
370
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
aktion033.gif


Danielle Tolan

Director of Operations

Indiana Horse Council

317-692-7141

[email protected]

www.indianahorsecouncil.org

From: Kathie Luedeke <[email protected]>

To: "Kathie Luedeke" <[email protected]>

Subject: American Horse Council - Senate USDA Appropriations Amendment

Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 4:16 PM

MEMORANDUM

To: AHC Member Organizations

From: American Horse Council

Re: Horse Slaughter Ban Takes Another Step

Date: September 27, 2005

The effort at the federal level to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption took another step forward when the Senate added a provision to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Fiscal Year 2006 appropriations bill that would prohibit USDA from using federal funds to pay salaries and expenses of USDA personnel to inspect horses for slaughter. The House had previously included this provision in its version of the USDA Appropriations bill on June 8.

The amendment was offered by Senators John Ensign (R-NV), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Trent Lott (R-MS), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). It passed 68 to 29.

Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, all livestock slaughtered, including horses, must be inspected by USDA personnel. This amendment would cut-off funding for such USDA inspection. The expectation is that without such inspection, buyers of horses for slaughter or horsemeat will no longer purchase either and the process will effectively be stopped in the U.S.

Since the amendment is part of an appropriations bill, the suspension will exist only for Fiscal Year 2006, which extends from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006. The proponents of the amendment believe that this will lead to a shut-down of the three U,S,-based slaughter facilities for a year, during which time they will work on the broader federal legislation providing for a permanent federal ban.

There are many differences between the House and Senate versions of the USDA Appropriations bill other than this provision. A Conference Committee will be organized shortly to reconcile these differences and bring one bill back to both the House and Senate for final passage. Any ban will not go into effect until Congress passes the final conference bill and the President signs it.

Primary House Bill

In February, 2005, Congressman John Sweeney (R-NY) introduced broader federal legislation to prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption. That bill (H.R. 503) was also sponsored by Congressmen John Spratt (D-SC) and Ed Whitfield (R-KY). It presently has over 118 co-sponsors.

This bill would prohibit the shipping, transporting, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines for slaughter for human consumption. Violations of the Act would subject a person to penalties of up to $3,000 and/or one year in jail for the first offense and up to $5,000 and/or two years in jail for a second offense. An offender may also be subject to civil penalties of $2,000 for each violation. The bill authorizes $5 million for enforcement.

The bill has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. There have been no hearings on this bill.

Primary Senate Bill

Similar permanent legislation has not been introduced in the Senate, but it is expected that Senators Ensign and Byrd will introduce a companion bill to the Sweeney-Whitfield House bill shortly.

If you have any questions about this legislation or its current status, please contact the AHC.

aktion033.gif
 
I'm going to post 10 questions. It seemed to me that we're not all on the same page when it comes to the amendment that was passed last week concerning horse slaughter. There will be 10 questions that I have answered the way I see things. If anyone sees an answer they feel may not be right, please respond, and if possible explain why you feel my answer is incorrect. We may find that out of 10 questions we may only have 2 or 3 that we don't see eye to eye on. This will make it much easier for those that are not up on the present goings on. I'd like to see this covered from both sides, no make that from the horse's side. They're the ones with the most at stake.

Please read the questions carefully, because we will be talking about 2 groups of horses, and some of the questions are long and complex.

All the questions will be assuming that the amendment passed last week is signed and is going into effect Nov 1st.

1. Does the amendment passed last week stop payment of inspectors at the three US slaughter plants forcing them to shut down.....YES

2. Does the amendment passed last week stop payment for section 903. Which financed the inspection of all horses going to Canada that were designated for slaughter......YES

3. Does this mean NO horses designated for slaughter may cross in to Canada after Nov 1st.......YES

4. Do all live horses have to be inspected by the USDA if they are going to Canada and ARE designated for slaughter........YES

5. Does this amendment close to border to all horse traffic.....NO

6. Do live horses going to Canada and NOT designated for slaughter have to be inspected by the USDA.......NO

7. After Nov 1st will horses NOT designated for slaughter be able to cross into Canada without a USDA inspection......YES

8. Does the amendment passed last week stop horses NOT designated for slaughter from passing into Canada without a USDA inspection........NO

9. Does a horse NOT designated for slaughter require a health certificate and negative coggins to enter Canada......YES

10. Is there any wording in the amendment that says after Nov1st any horse NOT designated for slaughter that goes into Canada cannot be slaughtered once it is there........NO

The Texas slaughter plants sent out a faxed letter stating that whatever was on the property by Friday would be processed but nothing new would be taken after Friday. He went to a sale this weekend and 30 horses were left. Just left at the sale. He said many went for 5.00. Yes 5.00! There were people talking about turning the horses loose to fend for themselves. Everything he has are not intended for slaughter they are intended for private sales but he said many of the killer buyers simply left. (The ones who strictly buy loads and take them to the plant) When the end of the auction came he said there were around 30 horses that no one knew what to do with. The owners wouldn't take them back and the "buyers" (the people who bid and then found out about the plant closings) wouldn't take them. Now the auction yard has 30 horses that who knows what is going to happen to. This is one sale where the people found out early what about all those sales where that didn't happen? How many horses are being left? This is going to be huge! I just don't understand how the people involved with this bill didn't forsee it happening. And now what are they going to do to help?

Since we know the anti slaughter side's position is that these 30 head of horses are not their responsibility

Since we have repeatedly asked if they have a process set up to rescue the horses and they have refused to answer

Since you can bet that the 30 head are probably not suitable for resale

It is going to be some poor souls job to collect them and pay to have them euthanized...or some state contracted vet will be contracted to do so.

If the first occurs, the need for our money to fund rescues just went out the roof (of course, the anti slaughter side will not contribute, right, because 1) this wasn't going to happen and 2) its not their responsibility.

If the second occurs, my tax dollars are being spent.

this is so sad...and those poor, sad, neglected and unwanted horses.
 
The old saying "be careful what you ask for- you might get it" Seems to rear its head here. People have fought to have there views imposed on legislation and thats as far as their responsibility goes. I think all the people who were in favor of the legislation would contribute to care for those and all of the other unwanted horses around the country. Like many of pieces of legislation they were not properly thought out. Want to bet there will not be horses just abandoned along the roadside the same as dogs and cats ?? Only when you hit a horse with your car of pickup it will do more damage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im confused, government isnt my strong spot in school at the moment ..

..does this mean horse slaughter will no longer be taking place?
 
The folks who lobbied for this legilation to be passed are likely highly pleased with the part they played in "saving" these poor animals from slaughter..... still blissfully unaware of the ramifications of their actions. The sad truth here is that there are things worse than going to slaughter for unwanted horses.
 
The truth is THEY now "Out sourced" horse slaughter

Showpony said:
The folks who lobbied for this legilation to be passed are likely highly pleased with the part they played in "saving" these poor animals from slaughter.....  still blissfully unaware of the ramifications of their actions.  The sad truth here is that there are things worse than going to slaughter for unwanted horses.
476417[/snapback]

 

Latest posts

Back
Top