Check it Out!
RE: Re: Horse slaughter
Since you are all on the subject of how h your horses meet their final end,
how they are to be "helped" on to their final moments, you might want to
consider that they could be treated as humans are.
Consider your horse in agony from one of several diseases and suffering. But
as you do not want to treat it as an animal and shoot it or slaughter it,
you care for it as a loving relative would for their kin.
You plug in all the tubes, you feed it drugs, you administer intravenous
feedings, you give it oxygen to help breathing, you do every thing except
let it die peacefully with respect.
Oh well, you are just being respectful and caring.
Look inwards and think.
(I dream of a captive bolt for my self when the time comes but!)
From: Kenzie_Kelly@spc.com [mailto:Kenzie_Kelly@spc.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 8:56 AM
Subject: RC: Re: Horse slaughter
Bette Lamore" <email@example.com> wrote:
<<I hope you're saying that it is wrong to send ANY animal to slaughter
in a cruel fashion and I have to agree 100%. I didn't eat veal for 10
years and supported FACT. The laws were changed and calves can no longer
be raised in a wooden box which allows for no movement. Now FACT is
taking on other animal practices, such as chickens, and I am all for it.
And I believe all of us are. Hey, there is nothing wrong in my mind with
eating an animal or plant (didn't anyone else read Stranger in a Strange
Land?? It's called "grokking" (TIC). It's the method by which any animal
is treated prior to death. I don't believe anyone on ridecamp who enjoys
nature and our horses as much as we do, wants to see any animal suffer.
That is not called tree hugging; that is called humanity and is what
separates us from the animals (who very often are kinder than us, I am
unhappy to say). Instead of debating how to dispose of our horses, we
simply need to lobby for better treatment until the point of death,
whatever the ultimate destination of the carcass--- which is just that.
Yes, I think shipping practices for all meat animals should be
improved. But the point I was trying to make is that the argument
about shipping treatment is also clouded by the way we think about our
horses. The people arguing (rightly! no flames please!) that we
should have closer, local slaughter houses to ease the suffering of
horses that must be destroyed (for whatever reason) probably don't
spend a moment's thought on how far the cow with a broken leg has to
travel to be slaughtered.
Granted, there are more slaughter houses for other meat animals than
there are for horses, but 2 miles can be a long journey for a
suffering animal who is forced to ride crammed in with another 40
head. It would be interesting to know how many slaughter houses there
are in the US, and formulate an average range for each one.
I wish I could remember where I read this, but an article recently
interviewed a man who had a feed lot for horses bound for slaughter.
He made some excellent points. One that sticks out was that he said
he tried to make the last trip in the trailer as humane and
unobtrusive to the animals as possible. Not out of any moral reason,
but because if the horse arrived at the slaughter house damaged
(kicked, bit, etc.) it lowered the price he received - if they didn't
reject the carcass which they were quick to do. This stuck out
because although your price for a damaged cow will be less, cattle
yards rarely reject a carcass.
He also made the point that if there weren't any slaughter houses
taking horses, we would have a massive overpopulation problem on our
hands. You can't change social taboos - most americans will always
feel that killing Trigger for his meat is wrong. But there should be
viable, humane, readily accessible alternative euthanasia practices
for the people (tic) and horses that need them.
Kenzie & Zane
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
Check it Out!
Back to TOC