The Slaughter Debate: Your Response
In my November '06 Horse & Rider column, "Save The Horses?" I asked for your thoughts about the unwanted horse dilemma and proposed bill to ban equine slaughter (H.R. 503), which passed the House last fall. (As of press time, the Senate had not yet voted.)
You responded. Surprisingly, nearly all of you sadly agreed that, without slaughter, the tens of thousands of horses that would otherwise be sent there each year (90,000 in 2005 alone) could face a life of neglect and potential abuse. You also overwhelmingly agreed that slaughter is but a symptom of a much bigger problem: over-breeding. I'm going to include portions of a sampling of the responses I received. Before I do, though, I'm going to share some enlightening math I did in an effort to help solve this problem.
As we know, H.R. 503 doesn't address the funding required to care for, euthanize (and dispose of) the horses currently slaughtered. The American Association of Equine Practitioners estimates an average cost of $5 per day to provide a horse's basic needs. That means the funding needed per year, per horse is approximately $1,825. (This does not include veterinary and farrier care.)
Here's The Math
$1,825 X 90,000 (using that 2005 figure) = $164,250,000 per year needed to support unwanted horses rescued from slaughter--just for basic care. That doesn't factor in the "unwanteds" added annually.
|
|
Since horses can live 20 years or more (some sent to slaughter are youngsters), you can see the enormity of the financial burden.
So I wondered if there was any way breed registries could add a special fee to existing registration fees, to help offset that burden. That way, people who breed would help solve the byproduct of their additions to the population. Then I did more math:
In 2005, 11 major U.S. breed associations registered 294,546 horses. (Of those, the American Quarter Horse Association accounted for 165,057; the American Paint Horse Association, 42,557.)
$164,250,000 รท 294,546 = $557.76. That's the additional amount needed per new registration to fund the rescue of those 90,000 horses. Like that's going to happen.
Short of a voluntary moratorium on breeding, what's the answer? And will breed associations, whose members produce hundreds of thousands of foals annually, go for it? When breeding volume goes down, so does their association income, which in turn pinches other member programs. Talk about a conundrum.
Fortunately, better brains than mine are studying the unwanted horse issue. In fact, the American Horse Council has put together the Unwanted Horse Coalition, which met for the first time last fall. Representatives from the AAEP, AQHA, APHA, Jockey Club, and other breed and sport associations gathered to discuss this very issue. No silver bullet emerged, but at least they're talking about it.
That's a start.
P.S. A few of you support a slaughter ban to reduce the price of horses, so the market will "self-correct." The theory being, fewer people will breed if horse prices drop. However, you can already buy registered horses for less than $100 at many sales. In fact, figures from one reputable sale in the Western U.S. reveal solid Paint weanlings being offloaded for $50 and $75. How much lower can they go?
What YOU Think of Slaughter. Letters from H&R's Readers.
Sue's grim conclusion is accurate. Without lawful slaughter the numbers of horses that would be living without proper care and attention would be astronomical.
I don't believe there can be a way to limit horse breeding. It seems every horse owner feels it is their right, whether for business or pleasure.
But humane transportation and humane slaughter is achievable. We must use our resources to guarantee a peaceful end to the lives of these loving and noble creatures.
Judy Monchamp
As someone who has had to put horses down, but hopes I will never have to send one to slaughter, I agree with you, but suspect you will get hate mail on your fine article. We all have different opinions, but when someone advocates passing laws that compel other people to abide by their opinions, it's time to be very careful.
Jon Blakistone
Wimberely, Texas
My home is in DeKalb, Illinois, less than five miles from Cavel International, Inc., one of three horse slaughter facilities operating in the U.S. Letters pro and con slaughter besiege our local newspaper. Those against it are filled with passion and love for horses, but contain little logic.
Those supporting it would have us believe only unwanted horses are on the trucks arriving there. None of these are unwanted horses. Each is wanted if a profit exists in its slaughter.
Personally, I'm not offended by it. I just don't want it done in my neighborhood. I've accepted the possibility that horses I've raised, trained, and sold may have cycled through owners only to be slaughtered a few miles from their birthplace.
  |
