Another round on the horse-slaughter issue


Your Nation and You

Stephen Winslow

vote4chg@yahoo.com






On Wednesday The Augusta Free Press published an editorial by Frances Yeardly (Another round on the horse-slaughter issue) regarding the issue of horse slaughter.

Yeardly called for horse owners and breeders to take more responsibility for what is happening to horses at slaughterhouses by being more involved in the breeding and sale of these animals. It was a reasonable and responsible suggestion.

Unfortunately, the suggestion came after a barrage of accusations directed toward supporters of HR 857, as well as writers for the AFP. Some of these statements must be addressed.

First off, I want to be clear on the reason why I, personally, became involved with this issue. Frankly, it was not because of the abuse of horses by the slaughterhouses. I became involved because of the political tactics being used by Bob Goodlatte to prevent this bill from being voted on in the people's house.

I became more involved after I listened to Goodlatte state with utter arrogance that he doesn't concern himself with what the people want. During a town-hall meeting in Roanoke he told people their feelings didn't matter because he "would continue to do what (he) thought was right regardless of what the people wanted." That is not an acceptable response from my congressman. When asked what kind of democracy this was when the people were ignored, Goodlatte stated, "this isn't a democracy, it is a republic."

Unfortunately, he forgot that this is a representative republic, and that he has a responsibility to respond to the will of the people when at all possible. In this case, he should allow HR 857 to come to the floor for a vote. However, he is blinded by personal ideology, and he knows that the bill will pass. With 226 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle, this bill will be on the way to the Senate before Bob can say "I love Dan Gattis."

Yeardly stated that information found on the subject "appears very PETA-inspired." That's very interesting to me considering I have not been contacted by that organization, and I have not taken any research from that organization. Could it be, Yeardly, that you chose to research PETA sites because of your distaste for them? If not, then let me encourage you, and others, to dig deeper then a single organization.

What troubled me about the statement is that it suggested that supporters of a bill to stop inhumane, sadistic horse slaughter had to be fanatics. That is ridiculous. Though I certainly do not deny that they exist, it is important to point out that much like critics of HR 857, fanatics are in the minority.

Yeardly shares the opinion that "anti-Goodlatte ads in The Virginia Horse Journal were shameful" and that "Goodlatte has researched and been counseled by some very good authorities." Yeardly goes on to say "I e-mailed Goodlatte from his Web site and received a very educational packet in the mail on the horse-slaughter issue." Then Yeardly questions "claims about abuse cases rising in states that have slaughterhouses."

I'm a little confused. It's OK to accept rhetoric that is sent to you by Bob Goodlatte at face value, but it's not OK to point out the inconsistencies in his statements? A packet mailed to you is fact just because it came from the congressman's office, but site-based research and statistics quoted to you is not fact just because it comes from an organization that you don't like? What kind of a juvenile spin are we putting on this issue if we maintain this train of thought? We are better than that, and those close to this issue are smarter than that. There is no hiding from the truth that stunning a horse with a captive bolt, cutting its throat and hanging it while it's still alive so that it will bleed to death is an inhumane practice.

In the end it doesn't matter. The facts speak for themselves. I understand that there are people like Frances Yeardly that would like this to be an issue that can tie up in a bow and pass off as a bunch of misguided individuals taking matters to far. Some people like to walk through life blindly because reality is too ugly. After all, ignorance can be bliss. If they want to continue to slaughterhorses in Mexico and Canada, so be it. We in the United States do not have to partake in the activity just because another country is. That is what independence allows us to do. When the dust settles, we in this country have a better moral compass then Yeardly's statements would suggest.

Then again, why listen to me? Below is a letter sent to me from Nancy Cade, who is a horse breeder, not a wacko. Her husband is an executive in the racing industry. Her father is Mert Proctor, formerly of The San Antonio Light and Stars and Stripes Europe. She states that there is more to this issue than meets the eye. She feels there is "a bigger Texas connection behind the scenes than you could ever imagine."



Dear Readers,

The Texas cattlemen and veterinary colleges receive a bounty for every horse butchered. The American Quarter Horse Associatn, whose major sponsors and benefactors are Fort Dodge (Wyeth) and Nutrena (Cargill) are pro-slaughter because it directly profits these two outfits. Fort Dodge needs the slaughter avenue kept open to dispose of their PMU mares, and Cargill, which also is one of the largest rendering outfits in the world, is grinding up the horses to add to cattle feed.

The other fact going unnoticed is that there is minimal, if any, testing for drug residues in the horses going into our food chain. Check with a trainer, they will tell you that all of the routine race-approved medications are labeled not for use in animals intended for food.

This is not just a bleeding-hearts issue, although it is a shame that the sheer horror of the way they die isn't enough to ban the practice. This is a political corruption and big business issue, plain and simple. It's the usual suspects and cast of characters from the BSE issue ... you have big business deep into the USDA and FDA, the cattlemen, packers and renders at the end of the leashes of Bob Goodlatte and Charlie Stenholm, and you have Goodlatte's "minder" Brent Gattis, son of Dan Gattis, the Texas cattleman who has his fingers into everything.

Another seamy connection is the fact that Smithfield Industries, headquartered in Virginia and Goodlatte's biggest contributor, owns ANIMEX, the largest horse-slaughter industry in Europe.

If you start peeling back the layers of connections, you will understand why this is such an unnecessary evil.

According to the American Horse Council, the median income of a horse owner is $60,000 - so why on earth would squeezing that last $400 out of their horse's life be needed?

The fact is, that without that meat buyer in the loop, the horse would go home with the under bidder, and live.- Nancy Cade
United States Equine Sanctuary & Rescue

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]