A Message From Equine Welfare Alliance President John Holland

 Hi Folks,

This is part three concerning the omnibus bill. Part one, as many of you have discerned, was our optimistic New Year's message hinting at good things ahead, and part two was the announcement of the defunding language in the omnibus budget and how it got there.

These developments have led to the question of how long this will stop slaughter houses from returning to the US. I will attempt to explain the answer to that question. Like most things in Washington, the answer is a bit convoluted. However, I think it is safe to say it will stop their return for at least two years and here is why.

Budgets are, as we all know, a one-year affair that begins October 1st. The process is supposed to start with the President's budget, which is broken into 12 separate budgets (such as the Agriculture Budget), which in turn go to the various appropriations committees to be amended.

These budgets are then supposed to go to the floor of their respective houses for a vote. Following their passage in the Senate and House, the resulting budgets are supposed to go to a conference committee to hammer out differences, and then back to the House and Senate for a final vote.

But if there is one consistent theme in Congress, it is that they almost never do things the way they are supposed to. According to the Congressional Research Service, Congress has passed a full budget only three times in the past 26 years! Most years they pass a CR for all or most individual budgets.

Last year, the agriculture budgets got through the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, but neither reached their respective floors for a vote. Both budgets had defunding language, as did the President's budget. The budget for other departments didn't even get that far.

A CR, or Continuing Resolution, is merely a way of keeping spending at the same level (or at some multiple of the current level) for an additional period. The duration can be from a day to as much as the remainder of the current budget year.

An omnibus budget is yet another way for Congress to shortcut its budgeting process. This fiscal year, we got a series of short CRs, followed by an omnibus budget.

Since the omnibus was based on the bipartisan budget "framework" agreement reached a month earlier, and since that agreement was for two years, we can be sure that the 2015 budget will be a one-year CR.

Now it gets kind of ironic. The late Sue Wallis, Dave Duquette and even Charlie Stenholm had speculated publicly, and no doubt prayed, that there would be a CR for 2014. That would have continued the funding for inspections from the previous 2012 and 2013 budgets.

However there is something call an "anomaly" that can be added to a CR to place a restriction on certain funds. Since nobody was sure the omnibus would pass, a CR was indeed prepared and tucked away to keep the government funded the rest of the year if the omnibus blew up.

That CR contained an anomaly that prohibited any funds from being used for horse slaughter inspections. So had they been forced to use the CR, it would have had the same outcome (defunding). We knew this well before the budget deal was struck, and actually expected that is the way things would go.

And why is this important going forward? It is important because it was none other than Secretary Vilsack who signed off on the anomaly. That explains why Victoria wanted to thank him. It also means that it will be virtually impossible for the pro-slaughter camp to accomplish a removal of the defunding language for the 2015 budget CR.

So the plants are locked out for two years and probably more. And that is the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey would have said.

USDA Approves Horse Slaughter, Despite Overwhelming Opposition

Today, in a mystifying and infuriating decision, the U.S. Department of Agriculture granted an inspection permit to a discredited horse slaughter plant operator in New Mexico, bringing the nation closer to its first horse slaughter operation since federal courts and state lawmakers shuttered the last three U.S.-based plants in 2007. The USDA has let it be known that it may also approve horse slaughter plants in Iowa and Missouri next week.

Consider these facts, each of which should have been sufficient to dissuade the USDA from proceeding with this inspection permit for New Mexico.

• The USDA granted the permit even though Republican Governor Susanna Martinez and Democratic Attorney General Gary King oppose the opening of the facility in their state. 
• The department took this action even though Congress, in its 2014 agriculture spending bill, is poised to forbid the USDA from spending money on horse slaughter inspections. In June, both the House and Senate appropriations committees approved amendments to defund any horse slaughter plants.
• The USDA is moving ahead even though the Obama Administration, in its 2014 budget proposal to Congress, recommended a defunding of horse slaughter plants. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has called for a “third way” in dealing with unwanted horses and expressed opposition to horse slaughter.
• Approval was granted even though The HSUS submitted a petition to the USDA that provides incontrovertible evidence that horses are routinely fed or dosed with more than 100 different drugs unfit for human consumption. 
• The USDA pursued this course of action just months after Europeans learned the hard way that horse slaughter operators and meat traders substituted their product for beef, throwing the European beef market and consumer confidence in the safety and integrity of the food supply into a tailspin. 
• Horse slaughter is being approved in spite of polling information indicating that an overwhelming majority of the American public – to the tune of 80 percent – opposes slaughtering American horses for human consumption.

I’ve been asked why the Administration would take this action, contradicting its own stated goal to end horse slaughter. And I cannot explain it, other than the lawyers at the USDA driving the train and offering a highly legalistic view of the controversy, given that Valley Meat has sued the USDA for unreasonably delaying action on its application. We seem to have a case where the decision-makers have decided they are obligated to grant the permit when there is a fact pattern that screams at them from every angle that they should not grant that permit.

Kathy Milani/The HSUSHorses held in

 export pens before transported for slaughter.

The Administration wouldn’t grant an inspection permit for a dog slaughterhouse even if the application for the permit was properly filled out and the operator hired a lawyer to compel action. Local and national opposition to such an idea would be more than convincing in compelling the USDA to keep any plant from opening up and sucking dogs into the slaughter lines.
The HSUS will work with state authorities to block this plant from opening, and will join Front Range Equine Rescue in taking the USDA to court on this issue. 
Horse slaughter is not humane euthanasia and is a betrayal of our trusted companions. The entire pipeline of horse slaughter, including auctions and transport in crowded trailers in freezing cold or oppressive heat, is abusive. The slaughter process itself is horribly cruel and many horses suffer during the misguided and often repeated attempts to render them unconscious. 
Sensible policy makers don’t want to see a bloodbath in the United States resume. Let’s hope we can hold off slaughter until the defund language, expected to take effect in a few months, becomes law.
Now is the time to express your concern to your members of Congress and urge them to pass the Safeguard American Food Exports Act to shut the door on horse slaughter once and for all.

Well, folks, I guess it really is time to kill all the lawyers. I'm just kidding - aren't I?

Related articles

• Horse Slaughtering for Food Set to Resume With USDA OK
• Fed officials approve horse slaughterhouse in NM
• Feds OK Roswell horse-slaughter plant
• Animal Welfare Groups Plan Suit in Response to USDA Decision to Support the Slaughter of Horses for Human Consumption

Trojan Horse Slaughter

James McWilliams

04/17/2013 | 9:28 am

As Americans watch Europeans condemn the discovery of horsemeat in their Ikea meatballs, we can take some solace in the fact that, for once, we’ve sidestepped an industrial food-related travesty. Our complacency, however, could be short-lived. Although less dramatic than horse DNA adulterating ground beef, another horse-related scandal is about to implicate U.S. citizens in a scheme that will send tainted horse meat into foreign markets while enriching U.S. horse slaughterers with taxpayer dollars.

The last U.S.-based horse slaughterhouse closed in 2007. The phasing out of horse slaughter in the United States ended the exportation of U.S.-produced horse meat to Canada, Europe, and Japan. This development, among other accomplishments, spelled the decline of a niche business that profited from a product that American taxpayers financially supported (through USDA inspection of horse slaughterhouses) but were loathe to consume (plus, it’s illegal to sell horse meat in the U.S.).
Over the past six years, though, a small cohort of national lobbyists and state representatives has worked to reopen U.S. horse slaughterhouses. Five states—Oklahoma, Montana, New Mexico, Tennessee, and Iowa—have already taken legislative steps in that direction. Their collective justification for doing so is that U.S. slaughterhouses are better for the welfare of horses. Without them, they argue, an endless stream of retired race horses will inevitably head to Mexico for slaughter, a terrifying prospect for animals who, advocates further contend, will meet an especially gruesome south-of-the-border death.

On the surface, this argument seems to make sense. Why slaughter horses abroad when we can do so at home? A closer look, however, reveals three problems, each of which suggests that any claim to reinstate horse slaughter on welfare grounds is simply a cynical ploy to dupe Americans into supporting a business most of us find abhorrent.

First, advocates of U.S. horse slaughter—the very people who insist they care about shortening the distance a horse travels for slaughter—opposed legislation restricting the distance horses could travel in the aftermath of the American closings. Sue Wallis, a Wyoming state representative and the most vocal proponent of reopening slaughterhouses (they call her “Slaughterhouse Sue”), wrote in 2009 that, “A key early initiative is to muster resources to oppose bills now pending in Congress that would ban the transportation of horses to other countries for the purpose of slaughter.” The intent here was as simple as it was sinister: to normalize long horse hauls to foreign soil and then highlight its inherent cruelty, thereby buttressing the case for a more “humane” local option.

Second, the claim that Mexican slaughterhouses are comparatively inhumane is equally problematic. Plants where U.S. horses have been slaughtered in Mexico are owned by the same European Union companies that once owned horse slaughterhouses in the United States. Supporters of local slaughter suggest that U.S. horses are being killed in an especially cruel and unregulated manner in Mexican-owned slaughterhouses, mainly by stabbing them in the spine. In fact, EU companies deploy standard procedures, using (most notably) captive bolt guns to stun horses before bleeding and processing them, just as they do in Europe and once did in the U.S. Ironically, the only documented cases we have of horse slaughterhouse cruelty and abuse come from the U.S. (back when slaughterhouses were legal).

Third, advocates of U.S. horse slaughter insist that, without the re-institution of slaughter at home, an unmanageable number of horses will continue to suffer the indignities described above. But the numbers don’t support this claim. Nearly 90 percent of U.S. horses die of natural causes or are euthanized at home. Bill Bullard, a California state representative and supporter of U.S. horse slaughter, says that the horse industry is desperate for “a way to dispose of our old, diseased, lame horses.” In fact, that problem has already been solved for the overwhelming majority of horses. They die the way our pets die—more often than not with quiet dignity.

Duplicity is one thing. But the upshot of this manufactured crisis is even worse: an impending public health disaster of global proportions. What supporters of U.S. slaughter never tell us is that the 150,000 or so U.S. horses that are annually slaughtered for export are bombarded daily with a hit list of toxic drugs, most notably phenylbutazone (“bute”), a common painkiller. While innocuous for horses, bute can cause, even in trace doses, aplastic anemia, agranulocytosis, thrombocytopenia, leucopenia, pancytopenia, and hemolytic anemia in humans. Eating U.S. horses, according to Tufts Veterinary professor Nicolas Dodman, “is about as healthful as food contaminated with DDT.”  The USDA currently has no program to regulate these substances.

In other words, lost in all the discussions about horse slaughter and horsemeat is a fundamental point: horses are not raised for food. They are, in essence, an industrial product. For Americans to recycle them into an edible but toxic by-product for foreigners to eat, doing so with taxpayer dollars and through an underfunded USDA, would be bad for everyone involved, most notably the 150,00 horses a year who’d be much better off not being used as Trojan horses to hide the profits of those who claim to care about them.

Related articles

• From the Horse Lover's Mouth
• WHOA: Wild horses at risk for slaughter
• Robert Redford Calls for a Ban on Horse Slaughter
• Responsible Horse Breeders Council Endorses Federal Bill to End Horse Slaughter
• Obama Moves to Block Horse Slaughter

From the Horse Lover’s Mouth

From the Horse Lover’s Mouth

WeMakeItNews.com Speaks with Congressman Jim Moran about Ending the Slaughter of American Horses & Recent Move by White House to Defund Inspections of Horse Meat

By Debra Zimmerman Murphey

For the first time on the policy front, and through the Obama White House, the United States Department of Agriculture’s proposed upcoming budget supports an initiative to defund horse meat inspections in the United States.

Previously, this kind of action had not been initiated by the executive branch, according to U.S. Congressman Jim Moran’s office. But as news of horse slaughter starting again in America intensifies, a public backlash has triggered grassroots and national attention. The announcement regarding the USDA’s Fiscal Year 2014 budget request, which does not include future funding for horse meat inspections, came last week.

“The USDA’s inclusion of language to defund horse slaughter inspections in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget request is an important step in the right direction. This decision reflects the food-safety concerns inherent to horse meat and is consistent with the 80 percent of the American people who oppose this inhumane industry. It is now up to Congress to do the right thing and vote to approve this language in the Fiscal Year 2014 Agriculture Appropriations bill,” Moran said.  

But Moran also points out that Congress has the “power of the purse” and there will be a battle regarding approving the defunding policy. He acknowledges that the pro-slaughter lobby is strong, but is hopeful that members of the public will let their elected officials know that horse slaughter is inhumane and that they do not want to financially support this kind of business sector.

Moran (D-Va.), a vocal opponent of horse slaughter, had requested just weeks ago in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack that the USDA include defunding language in its upcoming budget as a way of stopping horse slaughter in our country. In that letter, Moran raised several concerns about horse slaughter resuming in America and the meat from butchered horses being shipped abroad and sold for human consumption. His reservations include public-health issues, such as people eating potentially toxic horse meat, and pressing budget matters.

2-minutes with the Congressman — LISTEN to an excerpt from the Moran interview

Word from the White House — LISTEN to Part 1 of the Moran interview

The Meat of the Issue — LISTEN to Part 2 of the Moran interview

Indeed, Moran’s push now is even more urgent as the horse slaughter landscape has drastically shifted in recent months:

• Oklahoma passed legislation that ends a 50-year ban on horse slaughter.
• There are pending applications with the USDA for horse meat inspections at proposed horse slaughter plants in Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma and Tennessee, and one for a facility in New Mexico which filed a lawsuit and whose owner is awaiting the go-ahead to open the first horse slaughter operation in the United States since 2007 (sources: Bloomberg, The New York Times and Front Range Equine Rescue).
• The horse slaughter debate takes on a new intensity in light of a mounting controversy in Europe over mislabeled meat products, including those containing trace amounts of horse meat, and what creeps into the global food-chain.

Horse Slaughter in Headlines

While the gritty dialogue about domestic horse slaughter for human consumption in foreign countries gains momentum and increasing exposure, the mainstream and business media often frame the anti-slaughter faction’s responses as emotional and the perspectives they provide in their news coverage and editorials are sometimes narrow. However, in an exclusive audio interview with WeMakeItNews.com, Moran explains why banning the slaughter of American horses for human consumption is a logical and needed step.

In taking a position against ending the slaughter and transport of American horses for human consumption, Moran notes: 

• American horses are routinely given products and medications, such as the anti-inflammatory phenylbutazone, that are banned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in animals destined for human consumption;
• In our culture, horses (though categorized as livestock) are not commercially raised to be eaten by humans and both regional and national polling shows that a wide majority of Americans are against horse slaughter for human consumption; and
• Because Americans do not eat horse meat, reopening horse slaughter facilities in our country will result in taxpayers supporting an industry that does not benefit them during an era of fiscal constraints and dwindling federal funding.

Moran, who is serving his 12^th term as a representative from Virginia’s 8^th District, has been a longtime advocate for animal protection and a policy pioneer in helping pen and endorse legislation that will end the “heinous practice” of slaughtering American horses for human consumption. He is co-chair of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus.

For several years, Moran drafted an Agriculture Appropriations bill amendment, that was consistently approved, which defunded USDA inspections for horse meat. However, in 2011 that language was pulled in a closed conference, thus setting in motion the possibility for horse slaughter facilities to reopen in our country.

Speak Up Against Horse Slaughter

It is paramount for those who want to stop horse slaughter to take a few moments to reach out to their local representatives and senators in the U.S. Congress and request that they support a ban on the transport and slaughter of American horses for human consumption, including the USDA/White House’s recent policy move and the Safeguard American Food Exports (SAFE) Act. The latter is bipartisan legislation introduced this year that focuses on food safety as a route to permanently stop the slaughter of American horses for human consumption.

“Every dollar spent at horse slaughter plants would divert necessary resources away from beef, chicken, and pork inspections – meat actually consumed by Americans. … [Additionally], contrary to the claims of slaughter proponents, these [slaughter] horses are not old and unwanted, with USDA statistics showing that 92 percent of all horses sent to slaughter are in good condition,” Moran wrote to Vilsack.

“It is regrettable that Congress allowed the prohibition on federal funding for horse slaughter inspections to lapse. While I work to restore this ban, I strongly urge you to exercise all available options to prevent the resumption of this industry. I also stand ready and willing to work with you in developing a responsible plan for handling unwanted horses,” Moran concluded.

You can call the White House [202-456-1111 or TTY/TTD 202-456-6213] to help permanently stop horse slaughter, as well as ask for an end to transporting American horses to slaughterhouses in other countries.

Below is contact information for senators and congressmen/congresswomen in Maryland and Virginia or you can visit The Humane Society of the United States’ website to locate and contact elected officials in other states to share your opinion about horse slaughter and to ensure that the American people are heard regarding their stances against horse slaughter. Click here to access information from the Humane Society.

Please remember that horse slaughter is not humane chemical euthanasia, will only exacerbate the suffering of horses, and goes against American values. Slaughter ensures a horrific fate for horses – including racehorses, ponies, former dressage and show competitors, and pleasure, companion, working and wild horses – that are sold into the slaughter pipeline at auctions where kill buyers lurk.

Related articles

• Usda Embroiled in Flames of Horse-slaughter Furor
• Moran Calls on USDA to Deny Horse Slaughter Facility Permits
• VIDEO: Marchione, Tedisco sponsor legislation to protect horses from being slaughtered
• Bill would ban horse slaughter for food
• Congressman Moran Statement on Reports of Horse Slaughter Plants Reopening

Equine Welfare Alliance: US Horsemeat Banned in EU!

If Meat Plant Opens, Europeans Would Not Accept U.S. Product | Horse Back Magazine

If Meat Plant Opens, Europeans Would Not Accept U.S. Product
March 20, 2013

Mar 20, 2013 21:00 America/Chicago

Equine Welfare Alliance: US Horsemeat Banned in EU

CHICAGO, (EQUINE WELFARE ALLIANCE/PR Newswire) – Since Congress lifted the ban on USDA inspections of horse meat, several small shuttered cattle slaughter plants have clamored for the USDA to provide horse meat inspections. Ricardo De Los Santos of Valley Meats, a New Mexico plant, went as far as to sue the USDA for not providing the service. The attorney for Valley Meats has announced it will be opening in three weeks.

Unfortunately for those wishing to bring horse slaughter back to the US, they will have to do so without the ability to sell to the EU, the main market for US horse meat. The Equine Welfare Alliance has received confirmation from EU authorities that “by virtue of Commission decision 2011/163/EU the US is not authorized to export horsemeat to the EU.”

The decision was made in 2011, when the USDA neglected to comply with new regulations requiring submittal of a drug residue control program. Approval of such an application requires extensive review as well as audits and can take up to several years to complete.

The EU authority (SANCO) went on to say “Our Directorate General, up to now, does not record a recent residue monitoring plan on horse meat submitted by USDA.” In other words, the process has yet to begin.

The scandal over horse meat being substituted for beef in a myriad of products, as well as the finding of the banned drug phenylbutazone in some of those products has further dimmed the prospects for a lifting of the ban.

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, in an interview with Reuters, said sequestration could cause sporadic food shortages if inspectors aren’t available to examine meat, poultry and egg products. Obviously, providing inspectors for horse meat would further exacerbate the need to protect US consumers. Vilsack shocked many today when he was quoted as saying he hoped that Congress could come up with an alternative to horse slaughter.

EWA’s John Holland explains the bleak prospects for private horse slaughter plants in the US, saying “these plants will have no access to the markets even if the EU ban is lifted because the distribution is controlled by a few multi-nationals, and those expecting to contract with these companies should heed the story of Natural Valley Farms (SK Canada) which lost millions trying to do so.”

EWA is a dues free, all volunteer 501(c)(4) umbrella organization representing over 270 member organizations and 1,000 individual members worldwide in 18 countries.

Related articles

• Horse meat shipped through the Port of Houston
• America's secret and brutal horsemeat trade
• Equine Advocacy Groups Expose Gross Gap in U.S. Border Horse Slaughter Inspections
• EWA News Update: EU Horse Meat Scandal Spreads to Fourteen Countries
• Lawmakers, animal welfare groups aim to block horse slaughter plans

Save the Horses! Three Lawmakers Will Try to Ban Slaughter for Food

Save the Horses! Three Lawmakers Will Try to Ban Slaughter for Food - ABC News

Save the Horses! Three Lawmakers Will Try to Ban Slaughter for Food

By Chris Good
@c_good
Follow on Twitter
Mar 12, 2013 7:05pm
gty horse slaughter us nt 130301 wblog Save the Horses! Three Lawmakers Will Try to Ban Slaughter for Food














Image credit: Getty Images

A trio of U.S. lawmakers is saying “no” to horse meat.

The U.S. is set to begin slaughtering horses again for the first time in six years, and recent news of Ikea sausages and British Taco Bell beef containing small amounts of horse has raised horse-meat alarm bells among the meat-consuming public.

Congress originally banned horse slaughter in 2006 by defunding USDA’s horse-meat inspectors. But after the ban lapsed in 2011, a lawsuit and industry pressure has forced USDA to start inspecting again, and a company says it expects to open the first slaughterhouse in Roswell, N.M., within the next month and a half.

“These companies must still complete necessary technical requirements and FSIS [the Agriculture Department's Food Safety and Inspection Service] must still complete its inspector training, but at that point, the Department will legally have no choice but to go forward with inspections, which is why we urge Congress to reinstate the ban,” a USDA spokesperson told ABC News.

Enter Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Reps. Patrick Meehan, R-Pa., and Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.

The three will introduce a bill on Wednesday that would put a stop to the pending horse slaughter.

The Safeguard American Food Exports (SAFE) Act, as the House version is dubbed, would not only ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption in the U.S. but would also prohibit shipping horses outside the U.S. for food slaughter. Unlike the appropriations rider that had prevented horse slaughter until now, the statutory ban would not expire.

The Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals will hold a press conference on Capitol Hill on Wednesday with the three lawmakers, the two groups announced on Tuesday.

“Horses sent to slaughter are often subject to appalling, brutal treatment,” Schakowsky said in a statement emailed to ABC News by a spokesperson. “We must fight those practices. The Safeguard American Food Exports Act of 2013 will ensure that these majestic animals are treated with the respect they deserve.”

Related articles

• Lawmakers, animal welfare groups aim to block horse slaughter plans
• Pols move to stop horse slaughter
• Bill is introduced in Congress to ban horse slaughter in United States
• Ban Horse Slaughter in the United States

Horse Slaughter ~ Clipboard

Update ~ I just got the bright idea of putting the board on my sidebar so it would always be visible. What do you think?

This is my Horse Slaughter Board from Clipboard. The board is fully interactive. Click on it and a light-box will open and you can interact with the board just as if you were on the Clipboard site.

Be sure to check back because I will be adding to this board frequently.

Hope you enjoy it!

Related articles

• The Time For Action is Now
• USDA Cannot Enforce Horse Slaughter Laws

Secy. Vilsack - USDA Cannot Enforce Horse Slaughter Laws

Secy. Vilsack - USDA Cannot Enforce Horse Slaughter Laws | Animal Law Coalition

Posted Aug 17, 2012 by lauraallen

USDA/FSIS Cannot Meet the Legal Requirements for the Return of Horse Slaughter to the U.S.

Dear Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack:

The Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) Administrator, Alfred Almanza, has been quoted as saying that the agency is moving quickly to accommodate two pending applications to open horse slaughter plants in the U.S. Though as I understand since then, the applicant in New Mexico has withdrawn the application, and the Missouri applicant is beset with legal problems and was apparently not even the owner of the property proposed for the horse slaughter facility and cannot acquire any ownership interest.

Regardless, a horse slaughter proponent is circulating a "petition" to urge FSIS to move more quickly in approving applications and make inspectors available for horse slaughter for human consumption. The USDA has a number of legal obligations when it comes to slaughtering equines for human consumption; USDA cannot meet any of these obligations and for this and economic, environmental and other health and safety reasons, should not allow horse slaughter.

Substantial Taxpayer Costs with No Economic Benefit

As the U.S. struggles to climb out of the most devastating economic recession since the Great Depression, it is puzzling why FSIS would take funds from an already depleted budget to use for a program to inspect horses to be slaughtered for human consumption. Surely, the threats to food safety and humane treatment of animals are already significant with a reduced budget. Why would any funds be used for a program that results in no economic benefit to the U.S. and instead threatens the health and safety of our local communities and equines?

Prior to the closure of the 3 horse slaughter plants in 2007, FSIS spent approximately $5,000,000 annually for inspectors, basically subsidizing the three foreign-owned (Belgian and French) horse slaughterhouses. Americans don't eat equines so there were no sales of horsemeat domestically and thus no sales tax revenues from slaughter. Horse slaughter facilities pay virtually no income taxes. One facility operating in Texas prior to 2007 paid $5 in federal income tax one year on $12 million dollars in sales. In the preceding 5 years the federal income tax was .3% or 1/3 of 1% of gross revenues or sales. A forensic analysis of the tax returns revealed that the company avoided U.S. income taxes by selling the horsemeat at a loss to an entity it owned in another country and then that entity distributed the product overseas at substantial profit. With no sales or distribution in the U.S. and no tax revenue, there is simply no benefit to the U.S. economy from horse slaughter.

The property tax revenue to Kaufman, Texas where a horse slaughter facility operated until 2007 was generally less than $2,000 per year, a mere pittance when compared to the city's costs for pursuing the facility's continual violations of its wastewater permit and in working to address violations of regulations of Texas Dept. of Health and the Commission on Environmental Quality. The city's legal fees just to address issues related to the horse slaughter plant exceeded its entire budget for legal fees in one year. The city was even fined by the TCEQ for the plant's failure to comply with backflow regulations that meant horse blood and waste backed up into sinks, toilets and tubs. When the plant finally closed, the city was left with nearly $100,000 in unpaid fines for wastewater permit violations.

The situation was no different at the horse slaughter plant in Ft. Worth and the other in DeKalb, Illinois. In DeKalb, the horse slaughter facility had waste permits that allowed contamination levels for waste water that were eight times higher than usual. Yet, the facility was out of compliance hundreds of times. It was not a matter of having old facilities. The owner, Cavel International, built a state-of-the-art pre-treatment system that became operational in 2004. The facility remained out of compliance with its permit regularly until it finally closed in 2007. The blood and waste from slaughtered horses oozed from the state of the art tanks. There were also hundreds of FSIS violations.

The same was true of Canadian Natural Valley Farms where a 2008 investigation revealed the state of the art waste pre-treatment facility overflowed as well with blood and waste, and large amounts of waste and blood were dumped into nearby rivers. When the state of the art facility was shut down, the community was left with environmental contamination and a bankrupt company that claimed $42 million in losses.

None of this includes the plummeting property values, loss of new business, increased crime rates and a general stench and pall that hung over the communities. All courtesy of the horse slaughter plant. This is what President Obama's USDA wants for American communities?

If horse slaughterhouses are allowed to re-open, they would again be subsidized by American taxpayers. Estimates are that the U.S. government would spend at least $3,000,000-5,000,000 annually to subsidize private horse slaughter facilities.

On top of that, the USDA could give foreign owners of U.S. horse slaughter facilities, such as Bouvry, the Canadian company that has explored the possibility of opening a horse slaughter plant near Stanwood, Washington, or the Belgian company, Chevideco, which claims it may contribute to the building of a horse slaughter house in Oregon or Missouri, a subsidized loan of $750,000 through the RUS World Utilities Services.

Mr. Vilsack, it is outrageous that the American taxpayer should support wealthy investors in a business that profits from animal cruelty, benefits only foreign interests and wrecks the U.S. communities where the facilities are located. This money would surely be much better spent on American interests. It would seem more appropriate for USDA to focus on the live horse industry worth $112.1 billion of gross domestic product.

Few Low Wage Jobs

The argument that significant jobs would be created is specious. Horse slaughter plants operating until 2007 never created more than 178 low wage jobs -and many of these were held by illegal aliens. When horse slaughter plants operated in the U.S., this meant workers and their families overran local resources like the hospitals and government services. It meant low income housing and a decline in the overall standard of living.

Slaughter Contributes to Numbers of Horses in Need

Slaughter proponents have widely claimed that slaughter is somehow an alternative for "unwanted" horses. Nothing could be further from the truth. Slaughter actually creates a salvage or secondary market that enables overbreeding and poor breeding practices. Slaughter and a poor economy have resulted in horses in need. Slaughter is driven by a demand for horsemeat in some foreign countries; it is not a "service" for unwanted horses and that is why, as one of your department's own studies confirms, most horses, 92.3%, are healthy when they are sent to slaughter. Kill buyers are interested in buying the healthiest horses for horsemeat that is sold as a delicacy in some foreign countries.

The rise in numbers of horses in need and drop in horse prices is a result of the worst recession in memory. In fact, if slaughter controlled numbers of horses in need, there would be none as slaughter is still available and horses are sent to slaughter in the same numbers as before the 2007 closings of the slaughterhouses that were located in the U.S. It is the availability of slaughter that actually increases the numbers of excess horses and other equines on the market. Banning slaughter would reduce the number of excess horses and other equines.

Also, slaughter accounts for only about 3 cents for every $100 of the equine industry. It makes no sense for anyone to suggest a limited salvage market could influence prices in the entire horse industry.

The Live Horse Industry

Again, it is the live horse industry that USDA should support. Most horses end up at slaughter because they are purchased by kill buyers. Many horses could have easily been purchased by someone else other options include adoption programs, placing them as pasture mates/babysitters to a younger horse, donating them for use in horse therapy, or placing them in a retirement home.

Humane Euthanasia is Available and Affordable

Also, about 900,000 horses are humanely euthanized in the U.S. each year. The infrastructure could easily absorb those sent to slaughter. The average cost of humane euthanasia including the farm call and either burial, rendering or placement in a landfill can be as little as $50 depending on the method used, and at most $400.

Humane Methods of Slaughter Act Unenforceable for Equines

The USDA is responsible for enforcement of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, 7 USC Sec. 1902(a)("HMSA"). USDA/FSIS failed miserably at this when horse slaughter was legal. That is because the slaughter of horses and other equines simply cannot be made humane: Dr. Lester Friedlander, DVM & former Chief USDA Inspector, told Congress in 2008 that the captive bolt used to slaughter horses is simply not effective. Horses and other equines, in particular, are very sensitive about anything coming towards their heads and cannot be restrained as required for effective stunning. Dr. Friedlander stated, "These animals regain consciousness 30 seconds after being struck, they are fully aware they are being vivisected." The Government Accountability Office ("GAO") in 2004, GAO-04-247; and dozens of veterinarians and other witnesses have confirmed that ineffective stunning is common and animals are conscious during slaughter. It is simply not possible for USDA/FSIS to make equine slaughter humane and it is a myth to pretend otherwise. Also, the GAO in 3 subsequent reports in 2008, GAO-08-686T; and 2010, GAO-10-203 and GAO-10-487T, has continued to find disparities and inconsistencies in FSIS enforcement of HMSA, an abysmal record of tolerating cruelty at slaughter facilities.

Having to provide sufficient FSIS inspectors even to try to enforce HMSA means even more cost to the taxpayer. For a job that cannot be done when it comes to equines.

Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter Act Unenforceable

GAO has also confirmed that USDA/APHIS has not - and cannot - enforce transport regulations for equines sent to slaughter. 9 CFR Sections 88.1-88.6. Changing a few words here and there in the regulations will not make transport of equines to slaughter humane. USDA/APHIS allows the kill buyers and haulers to fill out and provide the documentation - which is routinely missing, incomplete or inaccurate - relied on for enforcement. It is impossible to enforce regulations when the information to determine violations is supplied solely by the kill buyers and haulers, the very people USDA/APHIS is supposed to be regulating.

A 2010 Office of Inspector General report confirmed APHIS lacks the resources and controls to enforce regulations for humane transport of equines to slaughter. Not only is the information relied on for enforcement supplied by the kill buyers and haulers, APHIS continues to approve of new shipments to slaughter by kill buyers or haulers that have outstanding unpaid fines for violations of humane regulations. The current regulations do not give APHIS the authority to refuse approval.

OIG also found there is no adequate system for tracking the information, such as it is, that is supplied by the kill buyers and haulers about the horses. It is very difficult to track what happens to the horses, meaning enforcement is virtually non-existent. Also, APHIS often does not receive any information from kill buyers or haulers. OIG noted in 2011 that for the past year or more, APHIS had not received the required paperwork, owner/shipper certificates, from kill buyers or haulers for any horses sent from Texas to Mexico.

On top of that, APHIS only has two agents to try to enforce these regulations. Your agency is hamstrung by its own regulations and cannot assure humane transport of equines to slaughter. There is every reason to think your agency could not even begin to assure humane transport of horses within the U.S. to newly opened slaughter facilities.

Food Safety

The Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") does not regulate equines as food animals. Americans don't eat horses and other equines. American horses are not raised, fed and medicated within the FDA guidelines established for food animals, making them unfit and unsafe for human consumption. Equines are given all manner of drugs, steroids, de-wormers and ointments throughout their lives. Equines are not tracked and typically may have several owners. There is no way to know when they are sold for slaughter what these animals have ingested over their lives.

The danger of American horsemeat to consumers was confirmed in a study, "Association of Phenylbutazone (Bute) Usage with Horses Bought for Slaughter" that was published in Food and Chemical Toxicology and authored by Dr. Ann Marini, Department of Neurology, Uniformed University of the Health Sciences; Nicolas Dodman, DVM, Tufts University, and Dr. Nicolas Blondeau, The Institute of Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology.

A kill buyer has no idea of the veterinary or drug history of a horse or other equine taken to slaughter, and many of the most dangerous drugs have no or a very long withdrawal period. A typical drug given routinely to equines like aspirin, phenylbutazone or Bute, is a carcinogen and can also cause aplastic anemia in humans. It has no withdrawal period. The FDA bans bute in all food producing animals because of this serious danger to human health. The FDA and USDA would prohibit Americans from consuming horses because of this danger. Yet, neither the FDA nor the USDA prohibits the export of American horses for slaughter for human consumption. It is a grave risk to public health to continue to allow the export of American horses for slaughter for human consumption in other countries.

The European Union has recognized this and has initiated steps to try to stop the import into the EU of meat from American horses that may be contaminated. Kill buyers have been found to falsify veterinary and drug reports to avoid the restrictions. There is no enforcement at the borders, meaning the US continues to dump contaminated and deadly horsemeat on Europe and other countries. A petition has been filed with the USDA to stop the slaughter of many U.S. horses for this reason.

Conclusion

Mr. Vilsack, in view of all of this, why would the Obama administration allow, let alone facilitate as a priority, the opening of horse slaughter facilities in the U.S.? I would urge the administration to reconsider this and instead work with horse owners, animal welfare organizations, the 80% of Americans who want horse slaughter banned, and end this grisly practice once and for all. Equines are in danger and equine welfare is threatened as long as slaughter remains available.

Related articles

• Butchering Family Gives Up on Horse-Slaughter Plant in New Mexico
• New EU Regs Spell Likely End to Euro Markets for American Horse Meat
• Crash Shines Light On Horse Slaughter Issue
• Horse Slaughter: The Truth Revealed Part 1 of a series by Jerry Finch | Habitat For Horses
• The Art of Deception

USDA Picture of One Transport Violation at Beltex Corp. in Ft. Worth Texas 2005

USDA picture of  transport violations of Beltex Corp. in Fort Worth, Texas in 2005. There are 899 more pictures from Beltex just like this one. Is this your idea of humane? Picture obtained under FOIA request.

via TweetDeck
 

Related articles

• Slaughter (rehomeyourhorse.wordpress.com)
• 2 Utahns indicted for alleged role in horse slaughter operation ()
• Change.org: Horse meat on Canada's Food Network (taholtorf.wordpress.com)

Undercover Investigation Underscores USDA - Documented Brutality

I doubt anyone is surprised at the outcome of this investigation - not even the pro-slaughter lairs who insist we reopen domestic "regulated" horse slaughter plants for the good of the horses. As I know from personal experience in Texas the US plants were no better than the ones in Canada and the EU certified ones in Mexico.

After mountains of evidence just like this anyone who says they believe horse slaughter is "humane" or "euthanasia" is either in deep denial or is a lying SOB who should be tarred and feathered. This abuse is REAL and UNACCEPTABLE.

Amplify’d from www.prweb.com

Undercover Investigation Underscores USDA - Documented Brutality

30 month long investigation proves worst-case scenario is ongoing

Westminster, MD (PRWEB) August 6, 2009

Slaughter horses in Shelby, MT It takes inhumane treatment to make the economics work Westminster, MD (PRWEB) August 6, 2009 A thirty month long investigation into the plight of horses who have been sold for slaughter has revealed the worst levels of inhumane treatment. The abuse and neglect of these horses, sometimes referred to as 'kill horses,' was uncovered during the investigation and is consistent with findings and photographs contained in a 906 page document released by the USDA last year. The investigation and report by Animals' Angels, a Maryland based animal welfare organization, confirmed that injuries and inhumane treatment documented by the U.S. Department of Agriculture during 2005 continue. Both USDA and Animals' Angels (AA) documents show horses severely injured, left medically untreated, ill, trampled to death and worse on their way to and at slaughter. Executive Director of Animals' Angels, Sonja Meadows said their investigations quickly revealed that, "Both government records and our report show that being on U.S. soil was not then and is not now the slightest guarantee of humane treatment." The slaughter of horses in the U.S., which stopped with plant closures in 2007, continues in Canada and Mexico. Groups advocating the slaughter of American horses have called for the reopening of U.S. horse slaughter plants, saying horses are better protected by U.S. humane laws than by laws in Canada and Mexico. However, during the 30 month long investigation that included repeated visits to auctions, feedlots and slaughter plants, AA investigators concluded abuse and inhumane treatment are inherent to the horse slaughter industry. "It takes inhumane treatment to make the economics work," said Meadows. "We found the cruelty starts well before horses arrive at the slaughter plant." The AA report documents available veterinary care withheld from horses severely injured or near death. Undercover investigators were routinely told, 'That horse is going to slaughter anyway,' or the horses were 'just passing through.' Treatment of horses designated for slaughter ranged from beating horses and jabbing them in the eyes, to using a cable winch to drag downed horses with a wire wrapped around a back leg. Investigators observed horses being injured or killed after being forced into dangerously crowded pens where they were kicked or trampled. Others were found frozen to the ground after overnight temperatures dropped well below freezing. Young and small horses, as well as horses injured or weak were trampled to death in trailers crowded with 40 horses. Workers failed to separate stallions, ensuring fierce fighting in close quarters during transport. Making conditions worse is the issue of stolen horses, according to Debi Metcalfe, founder of Stolen Horse International, Inc., which operates http://www.NetPosse.com, a horse theft recovery network that averages 80,000 unique visitors per month. "We have dealt with cases where horses were stolen," said Metcalf. "We later found out that these innocent pets had been slaughtered." Investigators also discovered at both Canadian and Mexican slaughter plants horses left in bloody 'kill boxes,' used to restrain horses as they are being killed, during lunch breaks. According to the report, the horses were 'shaking violently as if they might fall down.' Plant management told investigators the horses 'aren't bothered by it.' AA investigators documented injured and dead horses at every stop along the horse slaughter pipeline. At feedlots and export pens horses had no food and water troughs were empty. An export facility veterinarian informed investigators horses too weak for transport would be left behind to die in the pens. "The public has been duped into thinking horse slaughter has ended, but it just moved a few hours further down the road," Meadows pointed out. "It hasn't somehow changed into something it is not. It is the same terrible suffering it was in 2005." "By the time the horse finally stands in the kill box at the slaughter plant, it is often not the worst thing that has happened to it since this dreadful journey began," said Meadows. For a copy of the investigative report, click here... The documents including photos released by the USDA can be found here... About Animals Angels Animals' Angels is a 501 (c)(3) non profit organization with fulltime investigators in the United States and Canada. We work with law enforcement and government agencies to end animal cruelty and improve conditions for farm animals. We are in the field every week, trailing livestock trucks, visiting markets, collecting stations and slaughter plants. For more information please go to http://www.animals-angels.com

Read more at www.prweb.com

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/noD4pV

Related articles

• The True Unintended Consequences of Horse Slaughter (rtfitch.wordpress.com)
• Equine Welfare Groups Ask Congress To Save American Horses From Slaughter (goldendays-suzanne.blogspot.com)
• Call on American Veterinary Medical Aassociation to Oppose Horse Slaughter (goldendays-suzanne.blogspot.com)
• General Horse Slaughter Info (rehomeyourhorse.wordpress.com)

BLM's Final Solution for the Wild Horses and Burros

BLM's Final Solution for the Wild Horses and Burros

Originally Posted Dec 21, 2009 by Laura Allen

 

© Copyright Elyse Gardner

Horse Slaughter Information provided courtesy of Valerie James-Patton and Equine Welfare Alliance, http://www.equinewelfarealliance.org/

Internal documents from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) shed light on the agency's motives and plans for the wild horses and burros.

Two reports issued by the BLM for internal use only, The Herd Management Option Plans from October 2008, and the Team Conference Calls Report from July-September 2008 contain astonishing proposals to manipulate the WFRHBA and NEPA, eliminate the wild horses and burros altogether from the wild, and until they can be euthanized or sold most likely for slaughter, sterilize them and place them in feedlots paid for by rescue organizations duped into thinking the animals are in private "preserves".

BLM is the agency within the U.S. Department of Interior that is tasked with protecting the wild horses and burros pursuant to the Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, 16 U.S.C. §1331 et seq. (WFRHBA) as free roaming animals in their historic herd areas and designated ranges. "All management activities are to be at the minimal feasible level." 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1333. Wild horses are not to be subject to "capture, "harassment" or "death". 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1331

BLM team members involved in these discussions included Jim Stratton, Rob Jeffers, Al Kane, DVM; Jim Johnson, John Neil, Lili Thomas, Gus Ward, Alan Shepherd, Bud Cribley, and Don Glenn.

These reports are almost certainly the precursor to BLM's current proposal issued by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar in October, 2009. The plan as announced is essentially to:

(1) work with non-profits and  wild horse enthusiasts to create "preserves" in the Midwest or east, an idea that runs counter to the  WFRHBA mandate to maintain free-roaming behavior and avoid zoolike settings for these wild animals,

(2) designate additional ranges that under WFRHBA are to be "devoted principally" to the wild horses and burros, but under BLM they have been afforded the same or even less preference than grazing cattle and sheep and other uses of the land, and

(3) work to restore the "sustainability" of herds and public lands which, translated  from BLM-speak, means more slaughter and euthanasia of wild horses and burros and extinction of the herds through continued removal of  wild horses from their herd areas and ranges, aggressive "fertility control", monitoring of sex ratios, and introduction of non-reproducing herds.

This proposal is floating around Congress and the Obama Administration. There has been no indication there will be a hearing or any changes made to the laws or authorization of appropriations that may be necessary to implement the plan. The full plan has never even been made generally available to the public.

Indeed, BLM has already begun to implement this plan.  The removal or gather schedules for 2009-2010 are aggressive, and BLM has shown no signs of reconsidering these plans despite increasing calls for a moratorium on gathers and a pending request for a preliminary injunction on a large gather of 2,432-2,736 wild horses in Nevada set to begin December 28.  Indeed, just a couple of days ago, BLM announced plans to roundup 1,977 wild horses and remove 1,506 from the Antelope Complex in Nevada. The BLM has yet to issue the Environmental Assessment for this action.

And, earlier during the first week in December, without any public announcement, BLM rounded up 217 wild horses on the Nevada-California border. This gather of what are known as the Buckhorn wild horses had been scheduled for the summer, 2010. The roundup was conducted in secret, and it is not known how many horses were injured or killed or what happened to them.

Currently, allegedly "excess" horses, those deemed necessary to remove from designated herd areas or ranges basically because of overpopulation or to "maintain a thriving natural ecological balance", are generally held in short-term (STH) or long-term holding facilities (LTH) on private lands. 16 U.S.C. §§1332, 1333 As of May 31, 2009 there were 8,532 horses and 57 burros in short-term holding facilities that have a total capacity of 15,645 animals. As of that date there were 22,126 horses in long-term holding facilities that have a total capacity of 22,100. The long-term holding facilities are full. BLM claims there are 10,350 excess wild horses and burros that must be removed from herd areas and ranges. Since 2000, BLM has removed more than 74,000 wild horses and burros from the wild, 40% of the population.

Manipulating the WFRHBA

In these 2008 reports BLM employees and consultants discussed placing the wild horses and burros in LTH facilities on public lands by converting grazing rights for cattle. To do this legally, requires changing the status of the horses and burros from wild to titled or owned livestock. The WFRHBA protects wild horses on public lands, meaning they can't be corralled in LTH there.  BLM team members discussed that to keep the animals in LTH on public lands, they would create non-reproducing herds:  "One could argue that a non-reproductive herd is not self-sustaining. Also refer to [43 CFR 4700.0-6  (c]) which states: "Management activities affecting wild horses and burros shall be undertaken with the goal of maintaining free-roaming behavior." By managing for sterile animals we may be taking away their "free-roaming" behavior by altering the social interactions."  If the animals are no longer ‘free-roaming", they are not wild and arguably could be considered livestock and kept in LTH on public lands.

In effect, BLM proposed to manipulate the WFRHBA by actually intentionally destroying herd behavior, free-roaming behavior, which as an agency they are supposed to protect, so that they could get around another provision of WFRHBA to allow the horses to be kept in LTH on public lands.

BLM team members also considered ignoring the WFRHBA prohibition on"relocat[ing] wild free-roaming horses and burros to areas of the public lands where they do not exist" but noted,  "However, a solicitor's interpretation concludes BLM is not prohibited from moving excess wild horses to LTH areas on public lands because no case law implies such a prohibition. Should BLM elect to move excess horses to LTH areas on public lands, appeals or litigation would be likely and could take years to resolve."

BLM team members discussed that the LTH facilities could be nothing more than feedlots. "BLM (or others? ie horse advocacy groups? would buy livestock permits with the objective of managing the allotments for a non-reproducing herd. Due to trouble finding additional pastures for excess horses, we may need to have feed lots. If the humane organization did take over payment of feeding excess horses they would need to pay for whatever type of facility is available."

Note that BLM's current plan as described by Interior Secy. Salazar, calls, in part, for humane groups to take over the cost and care of wild horses and burros placed in "preserves" in the midwest and eastern states. "Preserves" is presumably a euphemism for "feed lot".

In this way, BLM would also manage the animals to extinction. The BLM team member discussed, though, "This alternative may require a change in regulations based on 43 CFR 4700.0-6 (a), which states: "Wild horses and burros shall be managed as self-sustaining populations of healthy animals in balance with other uses and the productive capacity of their habitat."

Actually, for this plan to be legal, Congress would be required to repeal the WFRHBA requirements that BLM manage wild horses and burros as free-roaming "components" of the public lands at the "minimal feasible level" and avoid "capture", "harassment" and "death". 16 U.S.C. § §1331, 1332, 1333.

 

© Copyright Elyse Gardner

Aggressive sterilization and manipulation of herd ratios

Other plans discussed by the BLM team to reduce the wild horse and burro populations included adjusting herd ratios from 50/50 to 70/30 male/female ratios with some of the horses returned to the wild after being gelded and an increased use of PZP, as well as using other unauthorized fertility drugs called Gonacon and SpayVac.

Team members acknowledged Spayvac was "barely available" for research, let alone approved for use as a contraceptive.

With PZP the BLM Instruction Memorandum requires field officials to consider using fertility control and justify when it is not used. During a June 15, 2009 meeting the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board noted the liquid the longer term effectiveness of the pelleted form of PZP is unproven. It is also well known that PZP may cause out of season foals.

In the 2008 team reports, BLM team members noted, "This alternative may require a change in regulations based on 43 CFR 4700.0-6 (a), which states: "Wild horses and burros shall be managed as self-sustaining populations of healthy animals in balance with other uses and the productive capacity of their habitat.  ...One could argue that a non-reproductive herd is not self-sustaining.  Also refer to (c) which states: "Management activities affecting wild horses and burros shall be undertaken with the goal of maintaining free-roaming behavior." By managing for sterile animals we may be taking away their "free-roaming" behavior by altering the social interactions."

Despite the clear language of WFRHBA and some of its own regulations, the BLM team asked,  "Do we have an obligation not to affect horse herd behavior?...Does it affect behavior and do we care? Burger stated in the late 80's that you should aim at a ratio favoring females, but BLM thinks a 50/50 ratio is natural. Would having more stallions change the band structure, will mares and colts be beaten down at water bottlenecks? Since we do not have any evidence [changing the sex ratio] is bad, the BLM should be allowed to do this on a large scale. We do not know if it is bad so should we wait until we know?"

BLM team members discussed options such as filling herd areas with only geldings or sterilizing all mares. BLM also discussed placing wild horses in non-reproducing herds and wanted to look in each state for possible places for these herds.

In one discussion team members proposed it would be easier to "justify" a non-reproducing herd rather than zeroing out herd areas.

The idea was to eliminate a herd management area for every non-reproducing herd area that was created.
The team noted, "When making changes on HMAs (sex ratio, gelding, etc) the implementation would be a trial and error".

BLM knew the aggressive sterilization of mares would mean an increased death rate of at least 10% and admitted that "herd behavior would be out the window". BLM admitted, in effect, these aggressive sterilization plans would not only be potentially dangerous to the wild horses and burros, destructive of their herds and families, but also illegal and ultimately cause their extinction.

Euthanasia and Slaughter

The BLM team's favorite ideas for eliminating wild horses and burros appear to be euthanasia preferably in the field and also by reducing restrictions on sales.
  
The team considered, "How many could be euthanized at a gather without having a NEPA?" The BLM is required by National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321, et seq., to prepare Environmental Assessments or EAs or, if indicated, Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) or Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), for any proposed changes to public lands that may have a significant environmental impact.  The law directs the agency to identify environmental concerns, consider alternatives including no action at all and take a "hard look" at the problem and minimize significant environmental impact. A significant environmental impact includes actions that are likely to be highly controversial or have uncertain effects on the quality of our lives and that affect cultural and historical resources. 40 C.F.R. §1508.27(b).)

In other words, BLM hoped to be able to kill as many wild horses and burros in the field as possible without implicating NEPA.

BLM also discussed drastically reducing the time wild horses and burros are available for adoption or sale before they would then be euthanized.

The team observed, "People willing to put down healthy horses at gather sites could be a problem....Having vets put down healthy horses at preparation facilities could be a problem...Provide counseling due to stress for employees and contractors that have to euthanize healthy horses".

Team members also asked how many more horses could be euthanized without affecting disposal practices. It was noted that Reno Rendering, for example, "will take as many as could be sent". They checked on the capacity of other rendering plants to take more wild horses.

One team member questioned, "Are we euthanizing horses to save money to complete gathers?"

Under the WFRHBA,  "[a]ny excess animal or the remains of an excess animal shall be sold if--
      (A) the excess animal is more than 10 years of age; or
      (B) the excess animal has been offered unsuccessfully for adoption at least 3 times." Currently, a wild horse or burro must be offered for adoption at 3 specific satellite or adoption events before qualifying for sale under subsection (B). Wild horses and burros sold in this way are called 3 strikes horses. Animals sold under this provision lose the protections of the WFRHBA. 16 U.S.C. §1333(e).

Adopters can take possession of 4 wild horses or burros at a time and title is not transferred for at least one year. 16 U.S.C. §1333(c) Only then do the wild horses or burros lose the protections of WFRHBA.

The team notes indicate, "The team needs to address selling horses without limitation....We need to make horses easier to [sell] by changing our policy on the criteria for what constitutes a three strikes horse."

The team discussed selling eligible horses at the gather site.

The team discussed that a horse would get a "strike" after each adoption event and also each 30 day period where a facility is open to the public by walk up or by appointment. In that way, BLM could say the horse had been offered unsuccessfully for adoption at least 3 times for a period of 30 days, even if no one ever even looked at the horse let alone considered the animal for adoption. After the third 30 day period of unsuccessful adoption offers, the horse would be euthanized on day 31.

A note from a team member states, "Sally had an e-mail from a person in Canada who wants 10,000 horses that he would slaughter the horses and send them to a third world country.  Don is going to send the email....Making horses easier to sale by changing policy on the criteria for what constitutes a 3 strike horse, which could be horses that have been in facility for 90 days or 3 weeks. Jim said he has a demand for horses going to Denmark, but they are having a problem getting titled horses."

Another note advises, "Address the need for congress to change the adoption law and allow instant title."

Notes from a June 15, 2009 Wild Horse and Burros Advisory Board meeting indicate "that BLM [should]advertise and market sale eligible animals (with the intent clause) in foreign countries with known good homes by offering "select sales" for sale eligible animals 11 years of age and over, and for younger animals that have been offered for adoption three times during a 90 day period and that BLM continue to explore opportunities to foster foreign aid by providing sale eligible animals (with the intent clause) to foreign countries for agricultural (nonfood) use."

Only BLM would call a slaughter house a "known good home". The BLM is obviously in contact with kill buyers, those that buy horses and transport and sell them to slaughter houses. Despite the mandate of the WFRHBA, BLM, the agency charged with protecting wild horses and burros as free roaming components of the public lands at the "minimal feasible level" is clearly attempting to smooth the way for their slaughter.

During its discussions in the past year BLM considered ways to keep the public away from round ups and the killing and sales of healthy horses and burros and planned to brand protests as "eco-terrorism".  This was all to be done in secret. Unless Congress or the courts step up and stop this rogue agency, it looks like BLM's plan may succeed.

 

© Copyright Elyse Gardner

  

© Copyright Craig Downer

Go here for information about the WFRHBA and how BLM has eroded the protections for the wild horses and burros. 
Go here to find out how you can join the call for a moratorium on BLM roundups of wild horses and burros.

Related articles by Zemanta

• An Open Letter To President Obama (goldendays-suzanne.blogspot.com)
• Congressional Committee Will Call for Moratorium on Gathers (goldendays-suzanne.blogspot.com)