The HSUS on "Wild Horses"

[Washington Hunter]

ok...now here's one I can actually disagree with:

House Approves Wild Horse Protection Measure

May 18, 2006

With tremendous grassroots pressure bearing down on lawmakers, the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously approved a measure May 18 to protect wild horses from slaughter. The outpouring of support from the American public was so overwhelming that House leadership conceded to the provision without a vote by individual members.

Reps. Nick Rahall (D-WV), Ed Whitfield (R-KY), John Sweeney (R-NY), and John Spratt (D-SC) successfully offered an amendment to the spending bill for the Department of the Interior for fiscal year 2007. The measure would end the commercial sale and subsequent slaughter of wild horses and burros.

Last year, the House overwhelmingly approved an identical amendment in a 249-159 bipartisan vote, as well as another similar appropriations amendment to prohibit horse slaughter, but the U.S. Department of Agriculture thwarted the will of Congress and used private funding to enable the grisly slaughter of horses to continue.

Take Action!

Tell Congress to protect horses by supporting a permanent ban on horse slaughter for food export.

"A public outcry has again begun across the United States over the change in law that now allows the commercial sale and slaughter of these animals," Rahall said. "We need to act before it is too late for thousands of these animals."

America's wild horses were protected from sale and slaughter for 34 years. Then, a year and a half ago, those protections were removed through a highly controversial legislative maneuver, without hearings, debate, or the introduction of a bill.

Late in 2004, Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) attached a provision to an omnibus spending bill, which passed without any public review and reversed a longstanding federal policy of protecting wild horses from being sold at auctions and subsequently shipped to slaughter plants.

Wild Horses Sent to Slaughter

It is already too late for hundreds of horses. On April 15, 2005, six horses were purchased by Oklahoman Dustin Herbert. Only three days later, these horses were sent directly to a foreign-owned slaughter plant in Illinois. Mr. Herbert told the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that he intended to use the horses for a church youth program.

One week later, another 35 were killed at the same slaughter plant after being traded unwittingly by the Rosebud Sioux Tribe soon after they were sold by BLM. By pure chance, another 52 were snatched from the slaughter plant line in a last-minute effort to preserve their lives by fast-thinking officials. Since then, we've lost hundreds more of our treasured wild horses to the slaughterhouse. We have graphic evidence in hand now that sale authority is not a workable solution.

Cruel and Inhumane Practice

The cruelty of horse slaughter is not limited to the slaughter itself. Economics, not humane considerations, dictate transport conditions. Horses are shipped in crowded trucks, frequently over long distances, and are typically given no food, water or rest. The truck ceilings are so low that horses are not able to hold their heads in a normal, balanced position.

"Horses have done so much for us in our country's history," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The HSUS. "They deserve much better than to be trucked across the country, prodded onto the slaughterhouse floor, hoisted up by a rear leg, and then bled out with a sharp cut to the throat-simply to appease the palates of foreign gourmands."

Only three horse slaughterhouses remain in the United States—two in Texas, one in Illinois—and all three are foreign-owned.

The Need for a Permanent Ban

Congress cast strong, bipartisan votes on the interior and agriculture appropriations bills for fiscal year 2006 in both the House and Senate (House Interior 249-159; House Agriculture 269-158; Senate Agriculture 69-28). But when the U.S. Department of Agriculture's found a way to circumvent the amendment to continue horse slaughter, it did more than undermine the will of Congress—it illustrated a clear need for a permanent horse slaughter ban with passage of the American Horse Slaughter Protection Act.

"Congress, on behalf of millions of Americans, has spoken out by an overwhelming majority to save these majestic icons of the West from a certain and inhumane death, and for that we're very grateful," Pacelle added. "It's up to Congress now to act with equal passion and pass the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act to keep all American horses from ending up in the hands of killer buyers and ultimately on dinner plates in Europe and Asia."

 

[BigHornRam]

What's the HSUS position on sea lions? I'd rather eat wild horsey meat then a fat nasty sea lion. If they have a fund set up exclusively for sea line protection, I'm going to donate.

 

[Washington Hunter]

My opinion: kill them all. (wild horses that is, not sea lions)
Make it into dog food, send the meat to Europe, I don't care. But get rid of the damn horses.

 

[TheTone]

I agree WH. How many more deer and elk could the southwest support without these things?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Tone,

How many more deer and elk could be supported on Public Lands if we didn't have domestic cattle on them?

 

[Washington Hunter]

Jose, good question but at least the cattle have a purpose. What good are the horses? I know I wouldn't miss them if they were gone. Would you?

 

[JoseCuervo]

What is the purpose of cattle on public lands? To raise our taxes? Destroy habitat for wild game? Undermine the free-enterprise system that made this nation great? Thank you very much, but I don't believe your Communist Ideals serve much purpose in this country.

 

[Washington Hunter]

What is the purpose of cattle on public lands?

Well, isn't it obvious?

They provide income to those who are in the ranching business, and they provide meat for those who don't hunt, can't hunt, or hunt but don't kill anything.

Now tell me...what are the horses good for?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Do you know anyone in the ranching business who derives income from cattle on Public Lands???? I know plenty of people in the ranching business who do NOT derive income from cattle on Public Lands.

How much meat do you think cattle on Public Lands provides? And do you think there are suitable, cheaper, non-subsdised sources for the meat?

 

[Washington Hunter]

How much meat do you think cattle on Public Lands provides?

How much meat do wild horses provide?

This thread is not about cattle on public lands. I know it's hard, but please try to stick to the topic.

 

[TheTone]

Jose/Gunner,

I'm not a fan of grazing our public lands either. One of my biggest silent gripes I have with my current job is the small amount that we graze. I do understand the income it generates for us, as a WMA doesn't get a very huge budget from the state. This year we were able to redo the grazing lease on it and we do manage the grazing pretty closely as far as the objectives we are trying to achieve with the grazing program. We are trying something a little differnt by increasing the number of cows in our pasture areas, but shortening the length of time they are in each parcel, as well as doing the rotation between pastures a little differently. I also don't enjoy having to work on fence to keep trespass cattle off of the public lands that I'm working on either.

 

[JoseCuervo]

How much meat do wild horses provide?

This thread is not about cattle on public lands. I know it's hard, but please try to stick to the topic.

Nice, another un-educated, redneck, six-toed comment..... "if it don't provide no meat than that aminal shouldn't be on our public lands".....

You wouldn't happen to have a cousin named cmmiddleton would you?


Tone,
Not to say that you don't get paid a lot, but I would guess the amount of grazing revenue doesn't even pay for your salary to fix the fences.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Amazing...you're against cattle degrading our puclic lands yet you have no problem with horses doing the same thing?

Like TheTone said,

"How many more deer and elk could the southwest support without these things?"

At least the number of cattle can be controlled and the grazing managed by the BLM and Forest Service, even if those agencies don't always seem to do what is best for wildlife.

You do realize the horses are not native, don't you Jose? Or are you as uneducated on the subject as you seem to be?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Since when has the number of horses on BLM land not been controlled? How much does the BLM get in revenue on those auctions of the horses out of the Steens in SoOregon? Don't those horses go for a $100k or better?

I am surprised that you think only animals that produce meat should be on our Public Lands.

 

[Washington Hunter]

I am surprised that you think only animals that produce meat should be on our Public Lands.

I never said that and you know it. The damage done by wild horses to wildlife habitat affects more than just deer and elk. Please tell me...why are you such a big fan of having non-native horses on our public lands?

How much does the BLM get in revenue on those auctions of the horses out of the Steens in SoOregon? Don't those horses go for a $100k or better?

I don't know the answer to that...why don't you do some research. However I am sure the revenue brought in is less than the expenditures.

 

[JoseCuervo]

I never said that and you know it. The damage done by wild horses to wildlife habitat affects more than just deer and elk. .

So now we are supposed to feel sorry for loss of food to the Cattle grazing on Public Lands? Sorry, but I don't think the cattle belong there in the first place.

I don't know the answer to that...why don't you do some research. However I am sure the revenue brought in is less than the expenditures.

Where did you ever get the idea that the grazing fees from Cattle on Public Lands exceeds the expenditures? Perhaps you could do a bit of research?

 

[Washington Hunter]

Jose, I don't like cattle grazing on public lands any more than you do. So I'm not sure why you want to argue that point with me.

I did find a good article by a BLM employee who is in charge of the wild horse program (Tom Pogacnik.) If you care to look at it, here's the link:

http://biology.usgs.gov/s+t/noframe/x182.htm


Here's one paragraph from the article:

Removing excess animals from populations that exceed appropriate numbers is expensive, has restricted BLM's attempts to pursue other management alternatives, and therefore has often allowed populations to increase dramatically. When populations reached crisis proportions, funding was increased and large numbers of excess animals were removed from the range and placed with private citizens through the adoption program. The number of animals removed often was greater than the number that could be adopted, resulting in high costs for feeding and veterinary services while animals were held pending adoption.

 

[TheTone]

I fail to see how removing excess animals has to be expensive. Its not that costly to tell people to dump wild horses on sight.

 

[danr55]

If there isn't room for everything on the open range, then there isn't room for anything.

 

[Moosie]

If there are no Cows on Public land.... Tom will have to hunt them behind the fence............