Showing posts with label United States Department of Agriculture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States Department of Agriculture. Show all posts

9/22/13

Boycott Beef Until the SA.F.E. Act Is Passed

Boycott Beef until the SA.F.E. Act is passed


Petition by Habitat for Horses 
   

We tried to reason, we spent our money in courts fighting you, we've taken those we’ve managed to save and watched our government bow to the horse slaughter industry. We’ve filed bills in Congress and watched them die, spent a ton of money trying to stop the roundups and slaughter, yet it continues unabated.

One hundred seventy thousand horses a year, 472 a day, one every 4.8 minutes, die in a slaughterhouse. Year after year, we have sought to bring it to an end. No one listened, most of the cattle industry laughed at us.

It’s time for that laughter to end.

The beef industry  has always been in full support of the horse slaughter industry. You've worked hand-in-hand with the AQHA and the BLM as they push for horse slaughter, and your influence in all 50 state Farm Bureaus has been consistent. You've taken every word from the paid propagandists and force fed them to the Farm Bureau members.

Knowing full well that your facts are pure lies, you have convinced those inside the Beltway to believe that you are the saviors of the horse industry.

You aren’t. You are horse killers, wanting nothing better for the horses of America than you want for your cattle - to be slaughtered and served to the consumer for a profit.

Now it’s time for the 80% to strike back in a way that will force you to listen.

Starting now, we pledge that we will not buy nor consume another bite of beef until the S.A.F.E Act is passed and signed into law. No hamburgers, no BBQ beef, no steak, no fast food with beef. And we ask that every person that is against horse slaughter do the same.

To:
American Farm Bureau Foundation, Executive Director
National Cattlemen's Beef Association

As an American horse advocate, I pledge that I will not buy beef of any kind until the SAFE Act is passed and the American horse is free from the threat of slaughter!

Not a dollar of my money will enter your pocket until you and your supporting organizations take the action necessary to support and pass the SAFE Act.

Sincerely,
[Your name]
Enhanced by Zemanta

6/13/13

ASPCA Commends House Appropriations Committee for Voting to Eliminate Funds for Inspection of U.S. Horse Slaughter Facilities

Duchess Horse Sanctuary
Duchess Horse Sanctuary (Photo credit: Marji Beach)

ASPCA Commends House Appropriations Committee for Voting to Eliminate Funds for Inspection of U.S. Horse Slaughter Facilities

Approved amendment would protect horses from cruel practice in the U.S.

June 13,2013

ASPCA Media Contact

NEW YORK—The ASPCA® (The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals®) commends the members of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee for approving an amendment to its fiscal year 2014 Agriculture Appropriations bill that would prevent the use of taxpayer dollars by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to inspect horse slaughter facilities. The Moran-Young Amendment, introduced by Reps. Jim Moran (D-Va.) and Bill Young (R-Fla.), would effectively shut the door to the grisly horse slaughter industry on U.S. soil.

A similar spending prohibition was put in place in 2005; however, in the 2012 budget, the language preventing horse slaughter inspections was not included, opening the door for a return of horse slaughter in the U.S., despite broad opposition to the practice. Several applications to open horse slaughter facilities have already been filed with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including one in Roswell, N.M. and another in Sigourney, Iowa.

"Horse slaughter is a cruel practice that only benefits foreign interests," said Nancy Perry, senior vice president of ASPCA Government Relations. "Using taxpayer dollars to fund this abhorrent industry is irresponsible and wasteful. We are grateful to Representatives Moran and Young for their strong leadership in advocating to protect our nation’s revered equines."

Horse slaughter is inherently cruel and often erroneously compared to humane euthanasia. The methods used to slaughter horses rarely result in quick, painless deaths, as horses are difficult to stun and often remain conscious during their butchering and dismemberment. Whether slaughter occurs in the U.S. or abroad, these equines suffer incredible abuse even before they arrive at the slaughterhouse, often transported for more than 24 hours at a time without food, water or rest, and in dangerously overcrowded trailers where the animals are often seriously injured or even killed in transit. The majority of horses killed for human consumption are young, healthy animals who could go on to lead productive lives with loving owners. Last year, more than 160,000 American horses were sent to a cruel death by a grisly foreign industry that produces unsafe food for consumers.
"Horses hold a special place in our nation's history and they deserve better than to be slaughtered for the benefit of foreign consumers," said Rep. Moran. "The Committee's vote today will not only save taxpayers' money, but it will help protect these iconic creatures from suffering a cruel fate."

While the Moran-Young Amendment in the appropriations bill protects American communities from the devastating environmental and economic impact of horse slaughter facilities, it does not prohibit the transport of U.S. horses for slaughter across the border to Canada and Mexico. To address this issue, U.S. Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Reps. Patrick Meehan (R-Pa.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), introduced the Safeguard American Food Exports (SAFE) Act (S. 541/H.R. 1094)—bipartisan legislation that would end the current export of American horses for slaughter abroad, and protect the public from consuming toxic horse meat.

In a recent national poll commissioned by the ASPCA, it was revealed that 80 percent of American voters, including the vast majority of horse owners (71 percent), are opposed to the slaughter of U.S. horses for human consumption. To learn more about the ASPCA’s efforts to ban horse slaughter, please visit www.aspca.org.
Enhanced by Zemanta

4/20/13

From the Horse Lover’s Mouth

From the Horse Lover’s Mouth

image

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 12th term as a representative from Virginia’s 8th 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.
Enhanced by Zemanta

3/20/13

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.
Enhanced by Zemanta

5/15/12

WSJ Serves Up Tainted Journalism On Horse Slaughter Plate






First the News Corp. phone-hacking scandal...now this?
Vickery Eckhoff Contributor
 
Wall Street Journal reporters Douglas Belkin and Nathan Koppel are in good company. On May 4, they published an article on horse slaughter so eerily similar to articles appearing in a variety of unrelated publications, even ol’ Rupert Murdoch himself might be left wondering.
How did they all end up using the same specific phrases and anecdotes? Twist so many of the same key facts? Quote the same people and ultimately, critically, leave out so much available data on the issue? Were journalists cribbing off a PR script prepared by the horse-slaughter lobby? Has anyone called Scotland Yard?
Origins of a Disinformation Campaign: Rebranding Slaughter

The horse-slaughter lobby represents a handful of powerful industries looking to bring horse slaughter back to the U.S.: meat packers and slaughter operators, for one thing. Cattle ranchers and the Farm Bureau. Then there’s the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and pharmaceutical companies (like the makers of  Read Premarin). Finally, there are the horse breeders and breed registries like the American Quarter Horse Association (AQHA) and American Paint Horse Association (APHA).
Naturally, they don’t like being identified as the “horse-slaughter lobby.” That sounds too mean. Instead, they call themselves “the horse industry.” This may sound like a generic classification for horse-related businesses and professionals, but it’s not.
You can own a racing stable, breed or show horses or run a veterinary practice, but if you’re among the 80% of Americans opposed to slaughtering horses, you’re not official “horse industry” according to “horse industry” people. They’ve appropriated that term to make their views seem mainstream, all while painting public opposition to slaughter as emotional and dangerous animal-rights driven extremism.
This is all a clever bit of disinformation, since 80% of the public is a very large group of Americans. It includes a long, bipartisan list of the members of Congress, business leaders and professionals both in and out of the horse world, entertainers and regular old Americans—all of them opposed to slaughtering horses in the U.S. or exporting them to slaughter.
Currently, horses are being exported to slaughterhouses in Canada and Mexico. This has been going on for years, even when U.S. slaughterhouses were open. What has changed is the provision for federal horse slaughter inspections ready to lunge forward thanks to a closed-door session that took place in November, 2011.
Essentially, three pro-slaughter U.S. Congressmen removed language banning inspections of horse-slaughter operations in an agricultural appropriations bill that was signed by Congress and President Obama.
The “horse industry” is doing all it can to seize the opportunity and push horse slaughter down the American public’s throat—with the right PR and the media’s help.
The distinctions—between the pro-and anti-slaughter sides and between foreign and domestic slaughter—are important for the public to know because key legislation is being pushed at the local, state and federal level.

Please read more about this great disinformation campaign here.

 Enhanced by Zemanta

5/4/12

An HSUS Report: Food Safety Risks Associated With U.S. Horse Slaughter



An HSUS Report: Food Safety Risks Associated With U.S. Horse Slaughter
April 2012
Abstract

Meat originating from U.S. horses may contain residues from substances banned by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Union for use in animals intended for consumption. Phenylbutazone, for example, is commonly administered to U.S. horses and has been associated with life- threatening reactions in humans. Requiring a thorough drug history for each U.S. horse intended for human consumption may help circumvent human health risks.

In t r o d u c t i o n

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of United States, an estimated 9.5 million horses reside in the United States.1 The American Veterinary Medical Association defines the horse as a "companion animal," along with dogs and cats.2 Horses are utilized for service, recreation, and competition in the United States.3 Despite their multi-faceted views of the horse, the U.S. population largely considers the consumption of horse meat taboo.4 In the state of California, for instance, eating horse meat is restricted under the state's Criminal Code5 and horse slaughter is illegal in Florida6 and Illinois.7 Given the attitude towards equids and the lack of demand for horse meat in the United States, they are defined as non-food producing animals by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).8

Despite the U.S. population's disinterest in horse meat, it remains a part of the diet of some consumers in other countries, such as France, Japan, and Italy.9 In 2007, a combination of state laws prohibiting horse slaughter and a simultaneous de-funding of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) inspections by Congress10 lead to the closure of the few, mainly foreign-owned, horse slaughter plants that operated within the United States.11,12,13 In November 2011, this defunding of USDA horse slaughter inspections was omitted from a spending bill signed into law. While new funds are not being provided for the USDA's resumption of horse meat inspections, the ban on domestic horse slaughter has been lifted.14

The 2007 provisions did not end the slaughter of U.S. horses for human consumption. Rather, the closing of U.S. slaughterhouses almost doubled the production of horse meat in Canada in 2007, with approximately 40% of the horses being slaughtered imported from the U.S.15 In 2012, the European
Commission released their findings of a 2011 audit which noted that 85% of the horses slaughtered in a Canadian processing plant originated from the United States.16 The United States also exports its horses to plants in Mexico for local and foreign consumption.17

Since U.S. horses are primarily used for companionship and competition rather than consumption, drugs may be administered without taking food safety implications into account. This is especially pertinent in regards to the administration of the substance phenylbutazone (PBZ). The presence of PBZ - as well as many other FDA-banned substances - in U.S. horses destined for slaughter results in the high likelihood of contaminated horse meat, which poses a potentially serious risk to the health of human consumers.18,19

Phenylbutazone

In 1949 the potent non steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) PBZ became available as a treatment in the United States for people suffering from both rheumatoid arthritis and gout. However, within three years of its availability, PBZ was linked to serious adverse reactions, including aplastic anemia, bone marrow depression, renal failure, and even death. After examining several case studies of PBZ use, the FDA banned PBZ for human use in the United States.20 According to the FDA:

“Phenylbutazone is known for its ulcerogenic, nephrotoxic, and hemotoxic effects in horses, dogs, rats, and humans. It is known to induce blood dyscrasias, including aplastic anemia, leucopenia, agranulocytosis, thrombocytopenia, and deaths. The reported adverse reactions were associated with the human clinical use of 200 to 800 milligrams phenylbutazone per day€¦.[I]t is unclear what level of exposure would be required to trigger such reactions in sensitive people. Moreover, phenylbutazone is a carcinogen, as determined by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) based on positive results in genotoxicity tests and some evidence of carcinogenicity seen in the rat and mouse in carcinogenicity bioassays NTP conducted.”21

For animals, the only FDA-approved phenylbutazone use is as an oral or injectable dose in dogs and horses.22,23 As it stands, PBZ use in humans and food-producing animals alike remains unapproved.24

Phenylbutazone in Thoroughbreds Bound for Slaughter: A Case Study

There can only be one winner at the end of each horse race, and many of the horses that do not place, show signs of injury, or are past their prime are sent to auction, and ultimately end up in slaughterhouses in Canada or Mexico.25 The European Union (EU) has found that horse meat originating from Mexican slaughterhouses contain harmful residues of several EU prohibited substances such as clenbuterol (bronchodilator), zilpaterol (used as a steroid substitute), and furanics (anabolic steroid).26,27 Due largely to over-breeding, the thoroughbred racing industry is one of the principal contributors to the estimated 133,241 U.S. horses slaughtered in 2011.28,29

Because of the intense training and racing endured by these horses, many develop musculoskeletal
injuries that trainers and owners treat with NSAIDs, of which PBZ is the common due to its legality in the racing industry. A study done by the Daily Racing Form found 99% of racehorses in California and 92% of horses at Suffolk Downs in Massachusetts are given PBZ on a regular basis.30 Certain racetracks allow only PBZ administration on race day, but all usage must be recorded on the horse's track record.31 This documentation requirement makes racing thoroughbreds convenient candidates for a case study of PBZ usage in U.S. horses bought for slaughter.

Nicholas Dodman of Tufts University Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Nicolas Blondeau of the Institut de Pharmacologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, and Ann Marini of Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences conducted a study to investigate whether thoroughbred race horses were given PBZ prior to being bought for human consumption, and to see how widely the FDA ban on PBZ usage in horses that end up on consumers' plates is ignored. The study identified 50 thoroughbreds rescued from slaughter and 18 thoroughbreds that were sent to slaughter. Each horse's Jockey Club lip tattoo allowed the researchers to find the registered name of all 68 horses, and each horse's drug record was obtained from their race track records.32

Upon review of the records, one of the horses sent to slaughter was not documented as receiving PBZ but the drug was identified in his blood test results, and another thoroughbred was administered PBZ by a veterinarian in the same month he was sent to slaughter. The remaining 16 of the 18 horses slaughtered and all 16 of the rescued horses were recorded as receiving PBZ within 24 hours of a race. Data collected by the researchers determined that the time interval between horse's last known dose of PBZ and the date they were bought for slaughter varied from a week to four years. However, it is important to note that the FDA, the EU, the United Kingdom, and Canada do not allow any use of PBZ in horses intended for human consumption regardless of withdrawal time.33

Another important aspect in understanding the risk of PBZ contamination in horse meat is the circulation of PBZ in the bloodstream. Horses possess 1.76 times the amount of blood per pound of body weight compared to cattle. With this much blood, it is possible that high-volume slaughterhouses€”one Canadian slaughterhouse processed 100 horses a days€”do not allow sufficient time for the horse's blood to be completely drained from the muscle, increasing the risk of meat contamination.34

The findings of Dodman, et al., indicate a serious discontinuity between food safety regulations and practice. Horses with a history of PBZ use are making their way to slaughter plants despite the United States' and other countries' ban of the use of the drug in food producing animals.

The European Union's Evaluation of Imported Horse Meat

In 2010, The European Commission's Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) evaluated food safety standards of imported equine meat from third countries (non-members of the European Union).35 The FVO have found that many third countries - such as Mexico, Canada, and the United States - do not keep veterinary pharmaceutical treatment records for horses; and there are no systems in place to differentiate equines intended for human consumption from all other equines. The evaluations also reported that third countries tolerate the administration of substances that are prohibited or unauthorized in food-producing animals in the EU.36,37 The United States has no official controls in place to verify the authenticity or reliability of the medical records and equine documents now required for horses destined for slaughter, only records of physical identification are required.38 These discoveries prompted the European Commission to facilitate corrective measures to their own regulations regarding imported horse meat, and to require third countries to implement action plans addressing compliance with the EU's requirements regarding equine meat.39

Since 2000, the EU's regulations state that horse meat cannot contain residues of veterinary medicinal products exceeding previously set limits or residue from substances banned for use in food producing animals in the EU. These restrictions include phenylbutazone. If substances prohibited for use in food- producing animals are administered to equids, those animals must be excluded from the food chain.40 Finally, imported horse meat can only be authorized if equines are included in European Commission- approved residue control plans in third country slaughterhouses.41

Both Canada and Mexico have submitted action plans in order to comply with the EU's import requirements for equine meat, and both plans have been approved by the FVO.42

In Mexico, horses imported for slaughter are to be microchipped and border controls have been strengthened. A sworn statement on veterinary medical treatments is requested for all slaughter horses, no matter what their country of origin. United States providers of imported horses (holding facilities) have been targeted in samplings of the Mexican National Residue Monitoring Programme (NRMP). According to the NRMP nineteen samples of horse meat in 2008, nine in 2009, and six in 2010 tested positive for residues of banned substances. All of the horses who tested positive were covered by a declaration stating that no treatments were given to the horses, and all of these horses came from U.S. providers. 43

In Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has implemented the Equine Information Document (EID). The EID contains a physical description of the animal, record of the animal's medical treatment for the previous six months, and requires the signature of the animal's owner at the time of ownership transfer to verify that all information is accurate. Horses bought for intended slaughter must have their EIDs also signed by the transient agent responsible for the care of the equine from time of purchase for slaughter until arrival at the meat processing establishment. Each CFIA inspected facility engaged in equine slaughter must present an EID for all domestic and imported equines presented for slaughter. If the EID indicates a horse has been given a substance not permitted for use in equine slaughtered for food, such as phenylbutazone, the horse will not be eligible for slaughter.44 However, the 2011 FVO audit noted "for those horses imported from the United States of America for direct slaughter, the equine identification documents received were not reliable..." The audit further noted that 85% of the horses slaughtered in this Canadian processing plant originated from the U.S. and all of these horses were imported for direct slaughter.45 Considering cases such as the one above, as long as there is no identification system in place, U.S. horses will not meet the European Commission's new food safety regulations, which will become effective in July 2013.

The European Commission mandated a transitional period of three years in which third countries have to provide guarantees regarding medical and drug history for horses during their last six months before slaughter. After the three-year transition period - which ends in 2013 - guarantees must be provided for the lifetime of the horses.46 This policy would complement the EU's "horse passport" legislation, which requires records to be kept of certain medicinal products.47 This required lifetime guarantee that a horse be cleared of all EU prohibited substances for use in food-producing animals could eliminate virtually all U.S. horses from the food chain. The substances banned for use in food-producing animals routinely administered by U.S. horse owners render most American horses ineligible for foreign slaughter. 48

Conclusion

The slaughter of U.S. horses poses a potentially serious health risk to human consumers, yet thousands are still slaughtered and sold to consumers. New measures put in place in the European Union to address the human health risk associated with horse slaughter are vital steps to insure U.S. horses, who are regularly given phenylbutazone along with other EU-banned substances, are kept out of the slaughter pipeline.

Prevention needs to start within U.S. borders. The United States should look to the European Union's horse passport and Canada's Equine Identification Document (EID) benchmarks. Requiring accurate medical records and identification documents, regardless of the horse's intended use, would draw clear lines regarding each individual horse's eligibility for human consumption. Until such a system is in place, meat from American horses may pose a public health threat.
________________________________________________________________________

1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States. 2010. FAOSTAT Live Animals. faostat.fao.org/site/573/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=573#ancor. Accessed April 12, 2012.
2 American Veterinary Medical Association citing U.S. pet ownership & demographics sourcebook. 2007. www.avma.org/reference/marketstats/ownership.asp. Accessed April 12, 2012.
3 National Economic Impact of the US Horse Industry. 2005. Deloitte Consulting, LLP.
www.horsecouncil.org/national-economic-impact-us-horse-industry. Accessed April 12, 2012.
4 Whiting, T.L. 2007. The United States' prohibition of horse meat for human consumption: Is this a good law? Can Vet Journal 48(11):1173-1180, citing: Grudzen C.R., Kerndt P.R. 2007. The Adult Film Industry: Time to Regulate? PLoS Med 4(6): e126. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040126
5 California Penal Code. Sec.598d. leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=7456524612+8+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve Accessed April 12, 2012.
6 Regulation of Trade, Commerce, Investments, and Solicitations. Florida Statutes. 500.451.
www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/500.451 Accessed April 12, 2012.
7 Illinois Horse Meat Act. Illinois Compiled Statutes 225 ILCS 635/1.5 www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1381&ChapterID=24 Accessed April 12, 2012.
8 Food and Drug Administration. 2005. ANADA 200-334 Equizone 100 (phenylbutazone) Powder
Horses: For oral use in horses for the relief of inflammatory conditions associated with the musculoskeletal system. www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/Products/ApprovedAnimalDrugProducts/FOIADrugSummaries/ucm061800.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.
9 Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Animal Health Division. 2009. Horse Meat Exports 2008.
www.agr.gc.ca/redmeat/rpt/08tbl39_eng.htm. Accessed April 12, 2012.
10 Federal Meat Inspection Act. 21 United States Code. §Â§ 601 et seq. uscodebeta.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=21+USC+601&fq=true&num=0&hl=true. Accessed April 9, 2012.
11 Empacadora De Carnes De Fresnillo De v. Curry. (United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit) (No. 05-11499). January 19, 2007. http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cases/cruel/slaughterhouse.htm. Accessed April 12, 2012.
12 Illinois General Assembly. 2007. HB1711, May 24. www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=095-0002. Accessed April 12, 2012.
13 Dodman, N.; Blondeau, N. & Marini, A.M. 2010. Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: a public health risk. Food Chem Toxicol 48(5):1270-1274.
14 Juozapavicius J. 2011. Horse Meat Inspection Ban Lifted in the U.S. Huffington Post, November 30. www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/horse-meat-consumption-us_n_1120623.html. Accessed April 10, 2012.
15 Alberta Farm Animal Care. 2008. The Alberta Horse Welfare Report: A report on horses as food producing animals aimed at addressing horse welfare and improving communication with the livestock industry and the public. http://equineenews.osu.edu/documents/HorseWelfareReport1-AFAC.pdf. Accessed April 11, 2012.
16 European Commission, 2011. Health and Consumers Directorate-General. Final Report of an Audit Carried Out in Canada from 13 to 23 September 2011 in Order to Evaluate the Monitoring of Residues and Contaminants in Live Animals and Animal Products, Including Controls on Veterinary Medicinal Products. ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/act_getPDF.cfm?PDF_ID=9456. Accessed April 12, 2012.
17 Wermund, B. 2011. Government study says more horses headed to Mexico for slaughter. Big Bend
Now July 14, 2011. www.bigbendnow.com/2011/07/government-study-says-more-horses-headed-to- mexico-for-slaughter. Accessed April 12, 2012.
18 Letter correspondance between Ann M. Marini, Department of Neurology and Program in
Neuroscience, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethseda, MD and Senator Jolie Justus, Missouri, May 3, 2010.
19 Dodman, N.; Blondeau, N. & Marini, A.M. 2010. Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: a public health risk. Food Chem Toxicol 48(5):1270-1274.
20 National Library of Medicine. 2010. Phenylbutazone. www.toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-
bin/sis/search/r?dbs+hsdb:@term+@rn+50-33-9. Accessed April 12, 2012.
21 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2003. New Animal Drugs; Phenylbutazone; Extralabel Animal Drug Use; Order of Prohibition. Docket No. 03N-0024. www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/03-4741.htm. Accessed April 12, 2012.
22 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2003. New Animal Drugs; Phenylbutazone; Extralabel Animal Drug Use; Order of Prohibition. Docket No. 03N-0024. www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/03-4741.htm. Accessed April 12, 2012.
23 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Approved Animal Drug Products: NADA Number: 010-987. www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/animaldrugsatfda/details.cfm?dn=010-987. Accessed April 12, 2012.
24 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2003. New Animal Drugs; Phenylbutazone; Extralabel Animal Drug Use; Order of Prohibition. Docket No. 03N-0024. www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/03-4741.htm. Accessed April 12, 2012.
25 Rhoden, W.C. 2011. Racing Should Care for Its Own. The New York Times, May 20, p. D5. www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/sports/racing-industry-should-care-for-its-own.html?_r=1. Accessed April 12, 2012.
26 European Commission Health & Consumers Directorate-General. 2011. Final Report of a Mission Carried Out in Mexico From 22 November to 03 December 2010 in Order to Evaluate the Operation of Controls Over the Production of Fresh Horse Meat and Meat Products Intended for Export to the European Union as Well as Certification Procedures. ec.europa.eu/foodfvorep_details_en.cfm?rep_id=2639. Accessed April 12, 2012.
27 European Commission Health and Consumers Directorate-General. 2011. Imports of animals and their products from third countries. Sec 5.3.1.1. ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/residues/third_countries_en.htm#5.3.1.1. Accessed April 10, 2012.
28 Rhoden, W.C. 2011. Racing Should Care for Its Own. The New York Times, May 20, p. D5. www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/sports/racing-industry-should-care-for-its-own.html?_r=1. Accessed April 12, 2012.
29 U.S. Horses Slaughtered Yearly. USDA Statistics courtesy of Darrell Charlton, Jr. www.equinewelfarealliance.org/uploads/00-Slaughter_Statistics.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.
30 Brown, A. 2010. Keeping Bute Out of the Food Chain. The Paulick Report, February 28. www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/keeping-bute-out-of-the-food-chain. Accessed April 12,
2012.
31 Dodman, N.; Blondeau, N. & Marini, A.M. 2010. Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: a public health risk. Food Chem Toxicol 48(5):1270-1274.
32 Dodman, N.; Blondeau, N. & Marini, A.M. 2010. Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: a public health risk. Food Chem Toxicol 48(5):1270-1274.
33 Canadian Food Inspection Agency. 2011. Ante and Post-mortem Procedures, Dispositions, Monitoring, and Controls-Red Meat Species, Ostriches, Rheas, and Emus. Meat Hygiene Manual of Procedures.
www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/meavia/man/ch17/annexee.shtml. Accessed April 10, 2012.
34 Dodman, N.; Blondeau, N. & Marini, A.M. 2010. Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: a public health risk. Food Chem Toxicol 48(5):1270-1274.
35 European Commission Health & Consumers Directorate-General. 2009. Imports of equine meat from third countries. www.defendhorsescanada.org/residues.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.
36 European Commission Health & Consumers Directorate-General. 2009. Imports of equine meat from third countries. www.defendhorsescanada.org/residues.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.
37 European Commission Health & Consumers Directorate-General. 2008. Final Report of a Mission Carried Out in Mexico from 04 September to 11 September 2008 In Order to Evaluate Public Health Control Systems and Certification Procedures Over Production of Horse Meat Intended for Export to the EU. DG(SANCO)/2008-7979.
38 United States Department of Agriculture. 2011. Animal Disease Traceability: A Guide to Identifying Horses and other Equines for Interstate Movement. www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/downloads/2011/FStrachorse.VS.pdf. Accessed April 10, 2012.
39 European Commission Health and Consumers Directorate-General. 2011. Imports of animals and their products from third countries. Sec 5.3.1.1. ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/residues/third_countries_en.htm#5.3.1.1. Accessed April 10, 2012.
40 European Commission Health and Consumers Directorate-General. 2011. Imports of animals and their products from third countries. Sec 5.3.1.1.
ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/residues/third_countries_en.htm#5.3.1.1. Accessed April 10,
2012.
41 Council Directive 96/23/EC On measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products and repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and Decisions
89/187/EEC and 91/664/EEC. European Parliament. April 1996. www.ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/residues/council_directive_96_23ec.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.
42 European Commission Health and Consumers Directorate-General. 2011. Imports of animals and their products from third countries. Sec 5.3.1.1.
ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/residues/third_countries_en.htm#5.3.1.1. Accessed April 10,
2012.
43 European Commission. 2010. Final Report of a Mission Carried Out in Mexico From 22 November to 03 December 2010 In Order to Evaluate the Operation of Controls Over the Production of Fresh Horse Meat and Meat Products Intended for Export to the European Union as Well as Certification Procedures. December 2010. ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/rep_details_en.cfm?rep_id=2639. Accessed April 12, 2012.
44 Canadian Food Inspection Agency. 2011. Ante and Post-mortem Procedures, Dispositions, Monitoring, and Controls-Red Meat Species, Ostriches, Rheas, and Emus. Chapter 17, E.2. June 2011. www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/meavia/man/ch17/annexee.shtml#e2. Accessed April 12, 2012.
45 European Commission, 2011. Health and Consumers Directorate-General. Final Report of an Audit Carried Out in Canada from 13 to 23 September 2011 in Order to Evaluate the Monitoring of Residues and Contaminants in Live Animals and Animal Products, Including Controls on Veterinary Medicinal Products. www.ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/index_en.cfm?reptoshow=2. Accessed April 12, 2012.
46 Whitcomb R. 2010. EU standards could signal new challenges for veterinary records, horse transport, and slaughter. DVM Newsmagazine, August 1. veterinarynews.dvm360.com/dvm/Veterinary+Equine/EU-standards-could-signal-new-challenges-for- veter/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/682251. Accessed April 10, 2012.
47 European Commission. 2008. Commission adopts single passport and matching chip for horses and other equidae [Press release]. europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/905&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN Accessed April 12, 2012.
48 European Commission Health & Consumers Directorate-General. 2009. Imports of equine meat from third countries. www.defendhorsescanada.org/residues.pdf. Accessed April 12, 2012.

The Humane Society of the United States is the nation's largest animal protection organization, backed by 10 million Americans, or one of every 30. For more than a half-century, The HSUS has been fighting for the protection of all animals through advocacy, education, and hands-on programs. Celebrating animals and confronting cruelty. On the Web at humanesociety.org. 
  
Related Articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

4/16/12

State Officials, Humane Groups Oppose Proposed Horse Slaughter Plant in New Mexico

Reblogged from Horseback Magazine: http://horsebackmagazine.com/hb/archives/15151

State Officials, Humane Groups Oppose Proposed Horse Slaughter Plant in New Mexico

April 13, 2012
Governor and Attorney General Blast New Mexico Plant

WASHINGTON, (ASPCA —The Humane Society of the United States, the ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals), Front Range Equine Rescue and Animal Protection of New Mexico condemn plans to open a horse slaughter plant in Roswell, N.M.

The plans for the slaughterhouse were uncovered in an investigation by Front Range Equine Rescue, a Colorado-based equine rescue organization. The proposed facility would be operated by Valley Meat Co., LLC, a company in Roswell that has already applied with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service for inspection of the slaughter of equines for human consumption. According to Front Range’s investigators, FSIS officials were scheduled to conduct a preliminary walk-through inspection of Valley Meat’s facility last month. USDA temporarily suspended inspections of cattle slaughter at Valley Meat Co. in February 2012 and November 2011 due to failure to comply with humane slaughter regulations.

“A horse slaughtering plant in Roswell is a terrible idea,” said New Mexico Attorney General Gary King. “Such a practice, while not illegal, is certainly abhorrent to public sentiment, and I strongly suggest it be abandoned. I come from a ranching family but processing horses for food was never part of the plan for raising livestock. Horses are different and should be treated differently.”

“As a veterinarian and someone who has had the great good fortune to grow up with and around horses, I am very saddened and angry about the recent revelations of mistreatment of horses in New Mexico,” said New Mexico State Land Commissioner Ray Powell. “If a horse is hurt, terminally ill, or has no chance to find a loving home, then humane euthanasia is a realistic alternative. I am told New Mexico is entertaining the idea of a horse slaughtering facility in our state. Since we do not have the horses in New Mexico to make this economically viable, it means horses would be trucked in from surrounding states. This is a bad idea on every level, and I strongly oppose it. New Mexico can do much better by these intelligent and gentle creatures.”

“Horse slaughter means tremendous suffering of horses, a proven history of environmental and waste violations, and allowing a toxic meat product to enter the human food chain,” said Hilary Wood, president and founder of Front Range Equine Rescue. “Solutions to horse slaughter include stopping irresponsible breeding practices, more gelding and euthanasia assistance programs, re-homing and re-training options, and short-term owner assistance programs. Horse slaughter has no place in the U.S. or across our borders.”

“American horses are our partners in sport, work and recreation—not dinner,” said Keith Dane, director of equine protection for The HSUS. “The entire process of horse slaughter is filled with nonstop terror, pain and misery for horses, and it is proven to have a severe negative impact on surrounding communities. It would be irresponsible for the federal government to sign off on a predatory industry that has no regard for animal or human welfare.”

“New Mexicans have a deep and enduring appreciation for horses, especially given their important role in our state’s rural way of life. It’s an affront to our citizens to suggest bringing the cruel, dangerous and polluting enterprise of horse slaughter to New Mexico as we celebrate our state’s centennial,” said Elisabeth Jennings, executive director of Animal Protection of New Mexico.
“The overwhelming majority of Americans are intensely opposed to this cruel practice, and as more people learn that we are allowing our horses to be shuttled off to gruesome deaths all for the sake of foreign gourmands, they are outraged, and opposition to this grisly practice is growing,” said Nancy Perry, senior vice president of ASPCA Government Relations. “Horse slaughter plants abuse more than just horses as they have proved economically and environmentally disastrous to communities in other states.”

In November 2011, Congress chose not to renew a ban on funding federal inspectors at horse slaughter plants in the United States, even though a similar provision has been part of the agriculture department’s spending bill for the past five years. That action opened the door for a return of horse slaughter to American soil, including taxpayer funded inspections of horse meat destined to be sent abroad, despite broad opposition in this country to the practice. A January 2012 poll commissioned by the ASPCA confirms that 80 percent of American voters oppose the slaughter of horses for human consumption.

When the last three horse slaughter plants in the U.S. closed, the surrounding communities cheered. These communities had endured water pollution, an unending stench of rotting blood and offal, and a negative stigma that caused other businesses to leave the community. The slaughter plants employed no more than a few dozen employees in low-paying, dangerous, high-stress jobs. In their quest for higher profits, the foreign-owned companies did their best to avoid paying property taxes and the fines levied against them for environmental violations.

Additionally, it is unclear how Valley Meat Co. or the USDA would address the medications, vaccines and other substances that are routinely given to American horses and are known to be poisonous if consumed by humans. Earlier this year, The HSUS announced its intention to pursue legal action if the federal government failed to follow required protocols to ensure that food safety and environmental review requirements were observed.

Last month, The HSUS joined Front Range Equine Rescue in filing a petition with the Food and Drug Administration to declare the meat of former companion, show, and working animals to be unfit for human consumption due to the risk of the meat containing toxic residues. Last week, the two groups filed a separate petition with the USDA to ban the slaughter for human consumption of such animals for the same reasons.

 Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
"From my earliest memories, I have loved horses with a longing beyond words." ~ Robert Vavra