Showing posts with label bute. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bute. Show all posts

1/13/13

A Sickening Ending - What If This Were YOUR Horse?

re-blogged from Shedrow Confessions ~
A Sickening End « Shedrow Confessions

A Sickening End

January 11, 2013 by shedrowconfessions

As we are all well aware, the biggest reason for slaughter given by the PSA (Pro-Slaughter Advocates) brain trust is that it is a way to deal with `unwanted horses’. According to them, slaughter keeps all these mystical beings from wandering the streets and becoming a menace to society and a drain on our tax dollars. Of course PSAs like Naughty Tobiano want us all to believe that kill buyers are just super nice guys trying to earn a living. They would never send good horse that had a use to slaughter. Instead, they just hang out at sales and pick up all these unwanted horses and `recycle’ them for a new purpose. Doesn’t that just make you all warm and tingly inside?

backstreetbully

Do you see the horse above? He was slaughtered at Les Viandes de la Petite Nation January 8, 2013. He was anything but unwanted. His name was Backstreet Bully and he was originally bred and owned by Adena Springs and raced under Stronach Stables. As many of you are aware, Adena Springs is owned by Frank Stronach and they have been leaders in the movement in finding new careers for retired racehorses. They have an entire division devoted to retired racehorses and have taken this commitment very seriously. Backstreet Bully wasn’t a great racehorse but he was graduate of their program. Here is the write up about him from the Adena Springs Retirement Program prior to him being sold:

“Backstreet Bully is a kind 4 yr old, 16hh OTTB chestnut gelding. He was retired from racing September 2008. He is a solid loving horse with tons of puppy dog personality. He’s got a great sound mind, willing attitude and is very well mannered; he just loves to be loved. He has been ridden both english and western walk, trot, canter and hacks out quietly both alone and with company. We have started basic Parelli training with him. Backstreet bully will make an excellent pleasure horse. He has no vices or bad habits. He trailers, cross ties, clips and is never a problem for the vet or blacksmith.”

Somewhere along the line, something went badly wrong for Backstreet Bully and he ended up in a kill auction. Details about what happened are still coming out, but every effort was made by Transitions Thoroughbreds and Adena Springs to save this horse. This is a quote from Transitions on their Facebook page about what happened at the sale:

“He was pointed out to me at the auction by an employee thereof as she knew I was there to buy tbs – I tried to buy him – my bid was not taken, perhaps not seen – I tried to buy him after from the kill buyer and was told no – he was meat only. He was not eligible for slaughter and it begs the question of why the very person who does the paperwork on every horse running through that auction would specifically point him out to me and describe him so that I could bid on him at that sale to buy him would do that if he was meat only as that would be something she would need to put on that kill sheet. He was NOT announced as meat only either in the sale ring. I tried to stop it again, I got no response, I contacted his connections who ARE on my list of people who most definitely do NOT want their horses going to slaughter and they took immediate action. His faxed drug records clearly proved he was not eligible. Everybody knows that all tbs have most definitely had at least bute amongst other drugs if they have raced – he was not eligible and he was killed for nothing!!”

I’m still trying to patch together all the details from various postings I have seen, but I do know this much…. this was not an unwanted horse and this was not a horse that should have been slaughtered for meat or any other reason. This horse was still alive when his drug records were faxed to the slaughter-house. The slaughter-house was well aware they were in possession of a horse not suitable for slaughter for human consumption and that there were people wanting to bail him out. Remember, PSAs tell you it’s all about not wasting the unwanted horse’s meat. Well this horse was far from unwanted and he was most certainly not suitable for human consumption, but Les Viandes de la Petite Nation went ahead and slaughtered him anyhow just because they could. What purpose did that serve? The response of the CFIA vet in attendance at the slaughter-house, after she was informed of this horse’s drug status was “We (LPN) would have a lot of horses here and what would we do with them all?” I gather that statement was in reference to how many horses they have that are not suitable for human consumption. What DO they do with them all?

537272_536570193020035_1292724459_n

I have no personal connection with any of the people involved with Backstreet Bully and his sad end. If they choose to come forward and fill in some details, that’s great but I will leave it up to them. They are heartbroken over this and I don’t know what more they could have done. I haven’t seen the name of the person who adopted Backstreet Bully nor do I know if it is the same person that dumped him at this auction. What is important is that despite the fact that this horse should have never been at that sale in the first place, he seems to have been slaughtered out of spite. People tried hard to rescue this horse. They tried to buy him in the ring, they tried to buy him before he went on the truck. They informed the slaughter-house, backed up with vet records, that this horse should not be in a slaughter pen and they still went ahead and did it just because they could. Yeah, kill buyers are great guys and slaughter is just for horses that nobody wants. Rest in peace, Backstreet Bully. We won’t let them forget you any time soon……

You bet we won't! Are YOU with us? This could just as easily been my horse or YOURS.
Enhanced by Zemanta

10/17/12

US Horses Head Back to Canadian Killing Floor - National Horse | Examiner.com

US horses head back to Canadian killing floor - National horse | Examiner.com

One horse sat at the auction yard yesterday, but sale expected to resume tomorrow
Sales starting again at Fallon, NV Livestock Exchange
 US horses head back to Canadian killing floor
October 15, 2012
By: Laura Leigh

This morning doors to Canadian killing floors reopened to take American horses for export.

On Friday apparently an "incorrectly labelled" shipment arrived in France causing the temporary shutdown of US horses accepted for import into the European Union (EU).

The lack of complete information given to US kill buyers and auction houses led to them to believe that the shutdown was due to the new regulations pending on US horse meat. The regulations will require a "passport" system that certifies animals as drug free and in the care of the seller for at least six months. Those regulations will become enforced sometime between now and July of 2013.

Auction yards and trucks have resumed "business as usual."

The Fallon Livestock auction in Nevada has notified customers that the regular Tuesday sale of horses will take place tomorrow. Yesterday there was only one horse at the auction yard.

However operations resume with the knowledge that changes are coming.

"It is only a matter of time before the unsafe practices cause this so-called industry to reform," said Connie J. Cunningham of Wild Horse Education, "in America horses are not raised for food."

All of this has occurred while the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act sits idle in Congress, with so many other pieces of Legislation.


Laura is an award winning illustrator, animator, writer and videographer. Her articles on Wild Horses and Burros have appeared in numerous publications. Her documentation has appeared in such venues as The I-Team Reports of KLAS-TV and CNN.
Enhanced by Zemanta

8/19/12

Secy. Vilsack - USDA Cannot Enforce Horse Slaughter Laws

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.
Enhanced by Zemanta

6/13/12

The Art of Deception

EDITORIAL | The Art of Deception
by Vicki Tobin 2012.06.10

Sue Wallis [or whoever pens her ramblings] has mastered the art of writing fictitious statements and making them sound feasible.

In a cover letter to the release of her latest piece of fiction, she states her paper is a representation of the horse industry. Where is the data to back that statement? She is well known for making baseless statements and then when challenged, she cuts and runs.

She wants to kill horses. Period. How is that going to help the beleaguered horse industry that makes its billions from live horses? The answer is obvious. It won't.

Wallis speaks for a foreign meat industry. When did the horse industry ever produce meat? They produce athletes and performance horses, not horse meat.

The first section is nothing more than an attempt to build a market that doesn't exist and never will exist in America. If Americans ate horses and there was a buck to be made, horse meat would be in our grocery stores. There was nothing stopping the selling of horse meat in the U.S. during all the years slaughtered existed on our soil and never a mention of wanting to sell horse meat.

She babbles on and on about the foreign countries consuming meat. Really, now. Who cares? Every country has its own culture and is free to eat and do what they please. In our country, in our culture, we do not eat our horses. She claims she'll feed the hungry. Do we really want the U.S. to be known for wiping out world hunger by feeding the hungry toxic meat?

We agree with her comment that journalists don't always fact check but this is a positive for
Wallis, not a negative. If journalists did check facts, none of her nonsense would be published.

She claims horse slaughter is humane but hasn't provided any evidence. There are mounds of evidence to the contrary. Continually citing Humane Methods of Slaughter, she fails to state that having regulations and enforcing them are not the same. There aren't enough inspectors and yet, she wants to expand their workload to horse slaughter plants that will further compromise our food supply. Government authenticated undercover footage has proved over and over again just how inhumane horse slaughter really is. Not being able to explain away the cruelty, she simply states they are all fabricated. If she pulled FOIAs from the former U.S. plants, she would realize just how baseless her statements really are.

All we hear is humane and regulated horse slaughter plants. This is coming from someone who thought it was good clean fun to crawl around in the bloodied carcass of a horse. Someone that defends a livestock plant owner wanting to open a horse slaughter plant that was shut down by the USDA for inhumane treatment of slaughter animals and someone that defends a feedlot owner that has been cited over and over again for violations. Listen to her carefully. She defends the cruelty and attacks the individuals that expose it.

Next, we move on to food safety. She makes the statement that horse meat is safe. Horse meat from horses in other countries may be safe but it certainly isn't from horses raised in America. U.S. horses are not raised or regulated as food animals. We race horses; we raise horses to perform, to work, for law enforcement, as therapy animals, for sport, for pleasure and as companions. The foreign countries that consume horse meat raise horses as food animals. They do not raise their horses for other purposes and then send them to the butcher. They have passport systems requiring a veterinarian record every medication given to the horse from birth. They do not allow a horse to obtain a passport over 6 months of age. The passport systems are national systems to ensure food safety, not a home grown system devised by those who will profit from horse slaughter.

Once again, she reaches out to equine scientists and veterinarians to give her ammo to get around food safety regulations. Medical doctors determine the levels of medications that are safe for human consumption and what medications are banned in food animals. Food safety is to protect humans, not animals. Equine scientists and veterinarians are not medical doctors.

Stating that horse meat is nutritious and including pictures of plates of horse meat does not portray meat from American horses. Add a little Phenylbutazone (Bute) to the meat and the nutrition is outweighed by the risk of developing cancer. Included in her paper is a letter from [again] non medial doctors that unsuccessfully attempted to refute a paper published on Bute in the Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal. In typical Wallis fashion, she failed to print the response to the letter that was published in the same journal that validated the original study.¹ A comprehensive study was also published by a group of veterinarians in Ireland on the effects of Bute in humans and the consequences for violating the passport system.²

One constant with Wallis is that you can always count on her rabidly trying to find a way around food safety laws-in particular, with Bute. The reason she is so irrational on food safety is that if food safety regulations were enforced with U.S. horses, there would be no horses to slaughter. So she does what she does best; explains it away with irrelevant documents and statements from individuals [or herself] that have no training or qualifications to speak to food safety.

One of her favorite tricks is to include a link to prove something, counting on the reader never actually reading the document. As one example, she cites a 2008 European Union (E.U.) report as proof that drug residues have never been found in U.S. horses. The report she cites has nothing to do with results - it was about establishing protocols concerning drug residues.

In December of 2010, the E.U. released a report on how well the slaughter plants were implementing the recommendations of the 2008 audit and this one did include drug residues in U.S. horses. Not only did they find several banned substances but also discovered that the accompanying paperwork was falsified.³ Of course, she ignores the report because it blows her argument out of the water.
She disregards the documents that disprove her statements and when challenged, there is never a response other than to start name calling. How dare those tree hugging, vegan, radical animal activists provide facts.

In another example, Wallis talks about the rate at which Phenylbutazone disappears from the blood stream, implying that it simply goes away in a few days. In fact, the drug does two things Wallis doesn't mention. First, it metabolizes into Oxyphenylbutazone, a compound with a much longer rate of decay and the same toxic properties. Secondly, it takes up in injured tissue. This accounts for its extreme effectiveness, but it also makes it reappear in the blood later. The bottom line is that Bute is banned in all meat animals for very good scientific reasons.


Bute is known as the aspirin of horse world. It is as common as the bottle of aspirin in your medicine cabinet. Walk into any barn in the U.S. and you will find a form of Bute or Bute compounds. Bute is banned in all food producing animals and is banned by the FDA and the E.U. that consumes the meat from U.S. horses.

The GAO report that Wallis frequently quotes is primarily anecdotal comments and she validates this with the comments in her paper. Comments and interviews are not data.4 As one example, veterinarians from the meat industry were interviewed regarding abandoned horses instead of the state agencies that receive and record the reports. When EWA requested the underlying data that formulated the assumptions, our request was denied; a further indication that data did not exist. Wallis completely ignores the GAO recommendation that horse slaughter be banned permanently.

Wallis blames the closure of the U.S. horse slaughter plants for the decrease in horse values and all the woes of the horse industry. Not only did horse slaughter not end but it increased. Nothing changed other than where they were being butchered. Anyone possessing even a rudimentary knowledge of cause and effect would understand what a ridiculous conclusion that is. One year after the plants closed, our country experienced an economic crisis that has been compared to the Great Depression. Every industry in this country experienced declines. Does she honestly expect anyone to believe that if the plants had remained opened, that only the value of horses wouldn't have declined?

A recent poll by the prestigious pollsters, Lake Associates, revealed that 80% of Americans are against horse slaughter. Wallis can continue starting new organizations, changing the names and aligning with foreign meat businesses. She can continue making unsubstantiated statements and claims of support but in the end, she will be run out of town as she has been every time she tried to shove a slaughter plant down the throats of communities in America.

And that, my friends, speaks volumes of the opposition to horse slaughter in our country.


The Equine Welfare Alliance is a dues-free 501c4, umbrella organization with over 245 member organizations and hundreds of individual members worldwide in 18 countries. The organization focuses its efforts on the welfare of all equines and the preservation of wild equids. www.equinewelfarealliance.org
 
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

3/28/12

Experts Calling for Slaughter Ban In Wake of United Horsemen Summit Cancellation


March 27, 2012
CHATHAM, N.Y., (Equine Advocates) — Horse experts from across the country will converge on Equine Advocates Rescue & Sanctuary http://www.equineadvocates.org/ in Chatham, NY for the 2012 American Equine Summit on Saturday, March 31st and Sunday, April 1st with one objective — to reverse the damage done by Congress in Nov. 2011 by mobilizing an effective grassroots movement to end the slaughter of America’s horses in the US and abroad. The attendees will be comprised of press, lawmakers and those involved with equine welfare and the horse industry. Interested parties are encouraged to “like” Equine Advocates on Facebook, follow us on Twitter @EquineAdvocates, and for live updates during the Summit, use the following hash tag: #AES2012.

“It’s just plain wrong when lobbies for the Agriculture and Quarter Horse industries can influence members of Congress to supersede the will of the more than 80% of Americans who want a federal ban on horse slaughter,” said Susan Wagner, President of Equine Advocates. “The ‘eighty percenters’ deserve to be heard. Instead, lawmakers controlled by special interests prevailed and gave horse slaughter proponents exactly what they wanted. It’s not only egregious, it’s downright un-American.”

The Summit will be opened by legendary concert promoter and horse lover, Ron Delsener. Two new speakers have been added – Dr. Caroline Betts, who will discuss the discrepancies in the 2011 GAO report on the closings of horse slaughterhouses in the US, and former US Congressman John Sweeney (R-NY), who was the primary sponsor for the successful passage of H.R. 503, the House version of the 2006 American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act.

Other speakers include Cathleen Doyle, former head of the California Equine Council and Save the Horses, John Holland, President Equine Welfare Alliance, Dr. Kraig J. Kulikowski, D.V.M., Katia Louise, director of the film, “Saving America’s Horses,” Victoria McCullough who helped pass Florida’s “Equine Protection Act of 2010,” Jo Anne Normile of Saving Baby Equine Charity and founder of CANTER and Paula Bacon, former Mayor of Kaufman, Texas who led the fight to close Dallas Crown, a horse slaughterhouse operating in Kaufman.

Said Bacon, “I believe a horse slaughter plant is among the very least desirable things a community would want.  It ranks with a lead smelter plant and strip clubs, the dead opposite of economic development. A horse slaughter plant creates big, expensive environmental problems for taxpayers and stigmatizes the community as ‘that place where they slaughter horses’ — and good development goes elsewhere.”

States currently trying to revive and reopen horse slaughter plants include Oregon, Missouri and Tennessee.

Founded in 1996, Equine Advocates is a non-profit equine protection organization and Horse Sanctuary based in Chatham, NY.  Its mission is to rescue, protect and prevent the abuse of equines, especially through banning the slaughter of American horses, through education, investigation, rescue operations and public education. Email info@equineadvocates.org or call 518-245-1599 for more information.
Enhanced by Zemanta
"From my earliest memories, I have loved horses with a longing beyond words." ~ Robert Vavra