Last US Horse Slaughterhouse to Close

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Associated Press

Last US Horse Slaughterhouse to Close

Friday June 29, 4:57 AM EDT

CHICAGO (AP) — A federal judge Thursday refused a request from the nation's last operating horse slaughterhouse to remain open, but a legal dispute over a state ban on killing horses for food isn't over.

Cavel International Inc.'s site in DeKalb was set to close at midnight Friday, when a temporary court order allowing it to stay open was to expire, according to Cavel attorney Phil Calabrese.

The plant, about 60 miles west of Chicago, is the last in the United States that slaughters horses for human consumption. Except for a portion sold to U.S. zoos, the meat is shipped for overseas' diners.

"Obviously we're disappointed with the ruling," said Calabrese, adding that the company could file an appeal as soon as Friday.


Read more: http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=ap-d8q2cjo00&

[David__77]

1. CA banned it several years ago.

The opposition argument to the proposition urged a "neigh" vote...

[mainer]

2. I do like horses, but I fail to see why they're special (and not cows)?

Confession: I'm am omnivore, so I can't claim a vegetarian's moral high ground. But horses seem pretty much on the same level as cows. Large mammals, maybe equal intelligence, just as likely to bond with humans. Why are Americans so outraged by the thought of dead horses and not dead cows? Or dead pigs?

Another confession: I own some very sweet donkeys, and I get sick at the thought of someone hurting them. I'm just asking a question that puzzles me.

[soothsayer]

3. Horses are helpful (pull plows, provide transport) while cows are

always trying to sneak off of your farm. Plus cows poop on themselves and on other cows, and cow manure doesn't smell nice and sweet like horse manure does. So...eat 'em!

[Debau2005]

4. From a horse owners perspective...

I am a vegetarian, but if I was inclined to eat meat, I would stick to beef. I have horses, they are routinely given vaccines, wormers, joint supplements, etc, that beef cattle don't get (I hope!) Most of these things that are given to horses have STRONG warnings about NOT using on humans. So I can't imagine that I would want to eat anything that had that many chemicals in the meat.

I would imagine that if horses were going to be used for human consumption on a wide scale, some sort of program would need to be instituted that would keep these chemicals away from them.

Also understand that for horse owners, one of our greatest fears is theft. Horses in areas nearest the plants, are in a high theft zone. It takes little effort to pull a trailer up to a horse barn, and load a horse and take off, especially if you are in a rural area with little traffic and neighbors not in sight distance to your barn. The plants that slaughtered these animals made little effort to determine where they came from.

It is also well known in the horse community that "broken down" race horses are routinely slaughtered. Kentucky Derby Winner, Ferdinand, probably ended up as a meal on someone's plate.
http://www.hsus.org/pets/pets_related_news_and_events/the_sport_of_kings_cant_provide_a_royal_ending_for_derby_winner_ferdinand.html

As a responsible horse owner, I am concerned about what is going to happen to horses that are unwanted, this may become a problem in the future.

edited for bad spelling...

[soothsayer]

6. They still go into dog food, don't forget. I think this just covers human consumption.

or did i read it wrong?

[Debau2005]

9. These plants just cover human consumption.

I never understood why horse for human consumption was not legal in the U.S. but we slaughtered our own to send overseas! Why can't they do their own slaughter? Just a thought...

[damntexdem]

17. They can. Now they will.

The losers will be workers in the U.S.

[CottonBear]

18. Exactly: horses are given meds and vaccines that clearly state not for human consumption.

Horses are not raised for food. There is no FDA or USDA oversight of what is given to horses because they are not animals bred and raised to feed people.

[Donnachaidh]

23. and racehorses that are done racing are slaughtered for pet food

and the drugs that get pumped into THEM (legal AND Illegal) should put any petowner off of buying horsemeat for food.

[rpannier]

5. It's one of those quirks of every society

Every society has reasons why they do or don't do certain things.
I live in Korea and there are Koreans who eat dog and have had cat soup.
But, there is a backlash now against it. It began prior ro the world cup and has continued as Koreans have become more interested in being seen as more sophisticated -- more western. Last week there were petioners stationed around the various subway stations around Seoul, Bucheon, Incheon, etc getting signatures to outlaw the dog industry. They were getting lots of signatures.

In America, more people see eating meat as unhealthy, unappetising, etc. Millions of Americans eat beef, very few are interested in eating horse. So, the horse slaughter houses are an easier target than the cattle industry -- fewer Americans eat horse meat and the cattle industry has billions of dollars to defend themselves.
100-150 years from now, long after we're gone, it's possible that eating beef in America will be viewed as something unusual, quirky or vile by the majority and it will go the way of the horse slaughter houses.

[soothsayer]

7. Eating dog always made sense to me. World's easiest hunting. "here, boy!"

[Yavin4]

15. I Thought That Was Funny

Mean, but funny.

:rofl:

[Nevernose]

25. That's barbaric, crass, gross, and tacky

At least according to dictionary.com.

You see, originally I was going to accuse you of being tasteless, but tasteless isn't an adjective I can really use is it? :evilgrin:

[Nevernose]

26. Chihuahuas were bred for food, right?

Or at least chihuahua-esque hairless dogs were bred by the Aztecs, Maya, and Inca as a common food source. Same as guinea pigs.

Of course, they thought human sacrifice was hunky-dory, too, but that doesn't make it okay.

For the record, though -- while I generally am not a big horse fan -- I've yet to meet the smartest cow who could compete with a horse in the animal IQ department.

[bread_and_roses]

8. It's about inhumane treatment, not meat, and cows are not companion animals

There are two aspects of this practice which do not apply to cows (or in the case of inhumanity, less so).

Horses are not raised as food animals. They are bred and raised solely for human pleasure and profit. that means that rather than being slow, placid, inactive, and un-attuned to humans, they must be the opposite. They have to learn to trust humans and to respond to human cues. Additionally, they must be alert to their surroundings in order to perform whatever "work" they will do - whether for pleasure riding or competition. Whether they are "more" intelligent than cows I wouldn't know (although I think probably so), but they have certainly been bred for a different kind of intelligence. And that kind of intelligence makes the slaughter process, which (perhaps) is (theoretically) humane for cows inhumane for horses.

On a basic ethical level, it would seem to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with developing that kind of trust in an animal and then subjecting it to slaughter, most particularly because...

...slaughter processes, from what I've read, are designed for cows, not horses. The transports in which horses are sent to slaughter are designed for the shorter, more placid bovines: horses suffer during transport and are often injured. The slaughter facilities themselves are designed for cows: for instance, the walls are high enough that cows can't see over them, but the taller and longer necked horses can. Reports are that this results in the horses being panicked in the chutes. The bolt mechanism, it is reported, is also designed for cows and is less accurate on the anatomy of a horse, reportedly resulting in horses being still conscious when they are slaughtered. Since this evidently involves being hoisted by one leg and hanging upside down from it, I can't imagine too many people considering that a humane end for an animal as large and heavy as a horse if the animal is still conscious.

Horses are brought into the world solely for our recreation and enjoyment. Those who breed and buy them should be responsible for assuring that they are humanely destroyed when they are sick. injured, too infirm with age, or when there is no option for placement in a home. Just as we are responsible for the same with dogs. Racehorses are the poster animals for horse slaughter precisely because they are the epitome of all the ills above: they are bred to be alert, to have instantaneous reactions, and even hundreds of thousands of $$ changing hands from their careers do not protect them from ending up in a slaughter-house like Ferdinand and Exceller. A testament to human greed and irresponsibility.

[robcon]

10. Remarkably unsupported argument.

I think the level your argument, kenzee13, can be summarized in the following...

"Horses are brought into the world solely for our recreation and enjoyment. "

That's a totally unsupported claim, made, it seems, as if you didn't have to support it, i.e., because our culture doesn't eat much horse, that it is RIGHT not to eat horse.

It is based, it seems, on some anti-evolution "reason-for-existence" model you made up, that animals are "brought into the world" (by whom?) for human recreation or for human consumption - choose one. Who makes the decision, and how do we learn of the decision on which animals are which, kenzee13?

[bread_and_roses]

13. oh, *sigh* I'm talking about DOMESTIC horses

as I should think would be obvious. OBVIOUSLY horses as a species were not "brought into the world" for human enjoyment (unless you subscibe to the Fundie version of creation and dominion, which I don't).

DOMESTIC horses are bred, sold, bought, kept for human recreation and for profit.

Way to go, Strawman.

[robcon]

21. Again an unsupported claim, kenzee13

"DOMESTIC horses are bred, sold, bought, kept for human recreation and for profit."

Huh? And that's it? They can't be eaten, because... well because you don't want them to be slaughtered for food. Not much of an argument.

[kskiska]

11. Two horses actually gave birth on the kill floor at Cavel

in the last couple months. If not for intervention by USDA people, the mares and foals would have been killed, too. It's supposedly illegal to kill pregnant mares, but since they're sold by the pound, it's common practice.

[doodadem]

12. Well said, Kenzee!

As a horse owner, I can tell you that horses are much more intelligent than cattle--and I also owned a pet Brahma steer. Horses love their work (mine are trained for the sport of dressage), and will seek out human companionship and affection. I have a couple that seem to be particularly adept at problem solving (which sometimes gets them into trouble!)

Americans in particular have had horses as an integral aspect of their history. We love their beauty, grace, and swiftness.

[MisterP]

22. I wonder if they're already planning a memorial to this "disgusting, short-sighted, harmful" diktat

once they win the War for Humanity and have (further) defeated the wicked Animal Army and their human Fifth Columnists
:crazy:
on edit: should be responding to Coventina's post below, have no idea how it got here

[MasonJar]

14. How totally heartless to kill horses for meat. My soul cries with

anger every time I think of how the Japanese murdered the beautiful Derby winner Ferdinand. I saw him win that race and such beauty is to be cherished. The humans involved in that and other similar atrocious killings used the horse until he had no more monetary value and then instead of putting him out to pasture, money-grubbed a last few dollars out of his awesome body. In the West as I understand it, wild horses are driven off cliffs as a government policy so the ranchers can graze their cattle on public lands for practically free. In Kentucky we value horses; they are our livelihood and they represent our honor.

[damntexdem]

16. What a damn shame! The PETA types win, the U.S. loses.

It was producing a perfectly viable meat for human consumption in a world that needs its food resources. It was an exporter operating in the U.S., providing jobs to U.S. workers. It was shut down for political reasons, to appease a fringe. Now some firm elsewhere in the world will produce the same meat.

In short, it's a disgusting, short-sighted, harmful decision.

[Coventina]

19. There are a few problems with your post. 1st: about food resources

If you are concerned about the world's food resources, I hope you are at least a vegetarian, if not a vegan. The production of meat uses up far more grain and water than if humans stuck to a plant-based diet. We could feed FAR more people if we were not pouring resources into the cattle and poultry industries.

Secondly, this was hardly a "fringe" issue. The vast majority of US citizens support the ban on slaughtering horses for human consumption. Google some polls if you don't believe me.

[Doremus]

28. Most of the horse meat was exported to Japan.

You know, the country that annually kills more whales than it can possibly consume and dumps the excess?

The "world" might need food resources, but you needn't worry about Japan. :eyes:

[Arugula Latte]

20. I do think this is all very subjective.

While I would never eat a horse, I also would not eat a cow or a pig (the latter is like a big dog -- just as smart and friendly, often).

[Codeine]

24. As a confirmed vegan

I still have to disagree with this ruling. It is incredibly hypocritical to decide "Animal Y" exists to be cut down in the prime of it's life and dismembered so it's musculature and organs can be eaten by people but "Animal Z" can never be killed for food, even after a long life. Either animals are for eatin' or they aren't -- there's no rational reason to break them into groups based on how cute or majestic they are. It's just a cultural prejudice; horse is a totally normal meat in much of the world.

[bread_and_roses]

27. Injury and pain are not "subjective." Nor is drug residue in meat "subjective"

It can be observed, measured, quantified. Animals crowded into transports designed for a shorter and totally differently tempered animal can be observed being unloaded in a state of distress and injured. Animals slaughtered by a process designed for an animal with a different body type, height, and temperment who are not efficiently and humanely slaughtered due to those differences can be observed in a state of fear and pain. And have been so observed in both cases. Most people would define inflicting suffering, pain, and fear as cruel.

If horses - since they are NOT categorized as raised for human consumption are given drugs not suitable for food animals, that too can be quantified. And while I'm not going to waste time worrying about adults who choose to eat horse (children are a different matter), I do think that people have a right to expect that any meat sold for food meets human safety standards.

All societies have food customs and taboos. In this society, a majority seem to have a taboo against eating companion animals. Nonetheless, I doubt the few slaughter houses processing horses in this Country would have been closed had it not been for the cruelty issue. Though I, for instance, consider eating horse meat by choice unethical, I would not have written letters and argued in support of a ban if there were no cruelty involved.

However, since for thousands of years domestic horses have been selectively bred for an ability to develop trust in and obediance to humans without losing their alertness and sensitivity to their environment I seriously doubt if there is any slaughter process that would not be inhumane.

[Honeycombe8]

29. That place of torture needs to close permanently.

In this country, of all places, to be slaughtering what to many people are beloved pets is a crime and is immoral.