The final vote on the Ensign/Byrd amendment was 68-29 in favor of ending horse slaughter by withholding funds for federal inspectors in horse slaughterhouses and at the borders! The House and Senate bills now go to committee to create a final law.

Since we won by 2/3rds in both the House and Senate, and since the amendment to each bill was identical, the committee would have no grounds not to include it in the final budget. Since it is a budget bill it is only going to be in effect for one fiscal year beginning November 1, but we still have HR503 in the house which can be passed by next year to end the business for permanently!

This victory is the direct result of hundreds of horse owners and lovers working tirelessly to get this issue in front of the public and to convince their representatives and senators to do the right thing.

We were opposed by powerful special interests like the AVMA and the AQHA, but we still won! From the bottom of my heart I thank everyone who took the time to get involved in this magnificent victory!

Mary Nash would be so very proud of you all!

Blessings be upon you and your horses,
John Holland

I had the incorrect date in my original post. I am delighted to say slaughter should end on October 1st!

Yesterday was a wonderful day for horses. I was so happy, it felt like a dream. The vote on the amendment says it all, the Senators should feel proud of this one. I am sure all their kids and grandkids would be proud of them too. I also got some other good horse news yesterday and many foals will have a chance at life! Robin V

I'm new to this site,, so hello everyone!! Horse slaughter has got to stop... it is sickening... I own a really nice stud that I planned on standing at stud,, but I never did,, as I found out more on horse slaughter,, I just couldn't stand the thought of one of the foals that my stud help create, go to slaughter, or any equine for that matter... but I'm here if anyone needs help in anyway,, pleaase let me know..

Hi ghorse,

We certainly agree with you about horse slaughter. I work on many of the anti-slaughter groups. If you want to become more involved, I highly recommend you join one like:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/againstslaughter/messages

I also agree with you about not breeding. I have two stallions, one of which is registered and had beautiful babies in the past. I don't breed him anymore because so many horses need homes.

John

Mr. Holland, I am still waiting for a reply on my origianl posted questions. I was directed to a web site that was supposed to show me the facts. It didn't. In the meantime I want to congratulate you on making the most elegant form of livestock on the face of the earth a pet with the same value as a mongrel dog. You truly have not idea what you have done for the horses you say you love. Look at the pet populatin problems and get a good look at the future of the horse. You have insulted my horses they deserve better. Do you really think the owners who choose to sell their horses by the pound will go home and call you to rescue them? How many will be dumped on the road like a dog, or shot, left to starve? I would rather see them dead on the rail.
Now prove me wrong give me the facts that say this won't happen.
Mary Thompson
Thompson Performance Horses

Hi Mary,

It is always stimulating to have people of different opinions. If you have specific questions, feel free to ask. I am sure you are open minded and honestly interested in the truth.

Here are just a few of the facts that prove that horse neglect and abuse do not increase when slaughter ends:

1) In 1989 over 335,000 horses were slaughtered. This dropped by a factor of almost ten by 2001. There is no evidence of a similar rise in neglect or abuse.

2) Five years ago Dr. Carolyn Stull made your argument before the California legislature when it was considering stopping slaughter. The ban was passed and she has since admitted abuse and neglect have not increased. Horse theft, however, did fall by 34% the next year.

3) The abuse and neglect cases in Illinois nearly doubled between 2000 and 2002. In March of 2002 the only slaughter house north of Texas (Cavel) burned. That year the number of cases of abuse and neglect leveled and the next year it fell.

4) Texas has two of the three slaughter houses in the country and one of the highest rates of reported horse abuse and neglect.

5) Slaughter plants do not want old, abused or neglected horses. They call these "sorry horses" and will not buy them. They want a horse that is 7 to 9 years old ideally. Horse meat changes with age. The Europeans scoff at young horses that they call "white meat" as opposed to "red meat" from mature horses.

I must admit, however, that I find your "love" for well bred horses (and dogs for that matter) remarkably similar a recent dictator's love of the "Arian" race of peoples. I, on the other hand, do not breed horses or dogs, and merely try to save a few who are produced by the puppy mills and "superior horse" mills like your own and end up dumped along the road or being sold by the pound.

Last week we (with the help of AC4H) bought Sara, an eleven year old registered saddlebred mare with champion blood lines out of Don Nickerson's kill pens at New Holland for $325. She is a wonderful, classy horse but that did not save her.

You say "You have insulted my horses they deserve better." I will end on a positive note by saying that I very much agree with the second part of that statement.

Best Regards,
John Holland

Mr. Holland,
I have asked my original questions in another post. They have not been answered with facts.
Now I will ask a new one. I just returned from a sale. It was not one of the cowbarn killer sales the anti-slaughter movement would have us believe killer buyers stalk unsusupecting horse owners. I watched horses sell from 40,000.00 down to 100.00. There were horse dealers there yes. I was one of them.
On the way home, I thought of just exactly what it will mean when this bill is signed into law and there is no floor on the market. Those horses that were sold for scale price would have no value. There would have no bid on them. What do you really think would happen to them when the owners who brought them had to load them up in the trailer and go home. Do you think they are going to call animal rescue and give them to you?
I don't, I deal with horse people everyday. I see all kinds of them some good, some bad. But you are trying legislate animal stewardship. You are either a horseman or you aren't the people who own the horses sold for pound price have a choice. It is their right of ownership. They know exactly what that low price means, they don't have to sell them for that. If they take a horse to a sale and there is no buyer a good number will just open that trailer door on a country road and keep driving. Other will take them home and shoot, or maybe even do that before they load them, others will just take them home and forget they own them.
The facts you have given me about the drop in abuse cases mean nothing. It has nothing to do with the drop in the number of horses slaughtered. What it does have to with is the drop in the economy and in horse prices, which by the way have fallen every year since 2001. That means the "horse mill" people and the backyard owners have dropped. There is the reason for the drop in abuse and neglect not the decline in slaughter rates.
I read in one of your posts that you own two stallions only one of them registered. If you are so intent on the well fare of the horse why are they not geldings? I am not a horse mill breeder. I buy young geldings, well bred ones I will admit, from people just like you and your neighbors or at the auction get them a career and resell them. I just sold one of them. I bought him from a backyard owner, who asked me 200.00 it really didn't matter to him if I was going to kill his pet or not. He just didn't want the work anymore. Horse wasn't halter broken, his feet were terrible but he was fat. Do you think I killed him, which I could have and made a quick 200.00. But what do you think he would have done if no one bought him?
Now tell me why even that well bred young gelding would have been any different than a stray dog with your law in place. They have well bred dogs dumped on the interstate also.
I would like to add that what we need are more people like you to rescue horse from the kill pen. Keep doing that and getting other people to do it. That is the solution, not changing the law, it puts a floor on the market and allows a quick end for the ones you and can't save.
Mary

quote:

But you are trying legislate animal stewardship. You are either a horseman or you aren't the people who own the horses sold for pound price have a choice. It is their right of ownership. They know exactly what that low price means, they don't have to sell them for that.

No, what we are trying to do is put a stop to cruel and inhumane ttreatment of the horses. If the slaughterhouses operated under humane treatment of the horses I am sure this is an option that would be more entertainable. I assume Ms Thompson youare willing to send your horse to slaughter when the time is right. Ownership in out country does NOT give the right to cruel and inhumane treatment..

Mary,

I found at least one thing we agree on. That is the fact that the rate of abuse and neglect is not tied to slaughter but rather to economic conditions and, I might add, weather.

As to your fear that the slaughter industry supports a bottom price for horses, I admit it sounds logical. Unfortunately, that is because people think of things in a static way. They think there are X number of unwanted horses and Y number slaughtered. The system is NOT static. It is a system of supply and demand and it will adjust accordingly.

Several of us studied the government's figures on the average price of horses and tried to relate it to the level of horse slaughter at the time. We could find no relationship at all.

Slaughter is, by the very nature of the process, inhumane. This includes the way these horses are kept, transported, and killed. I have seen all these stages and no words anyone can write will convince me otherwise.

As to my two stallions, one is a registered Tennessee Walker and a very close pal. He is very mellow in his old age, but once he was an amazing creature to ride. Part of that was his not being gelded. I like him as a stallion and would not change him for the world. The other was born a cryptorchid and we did not want to subject him to the surgery and hospitalization. Our more recent TW rescue, a palomino yearling colt with OCD, we did have gelded, even though he is registered and from wonderful stock.

Unfortunately, you seem to think that there are registered horses and trash horses, and that breeding registered horses does not add to the problem. I hate to tell you that a very large percentage of horses slaughtered are in fact registered. Most common are registered Quarter Horses, and second most common are the Thoroughbreds, but we have seen former champion horses end up in the kill pens. Even Kentucky Derby winner Ferdinand was slaughtered.

Finally, you get to the crux, and that is the issue of "property rights". I only need to point out that the civil war was fought largely on the alter of "property rights" of slave owners. Many of our laws recognize the fact that living things are different from inanimate objects. As to "legislating husbandry" there are countless state and local laws that already do that and I don't see any ill effects on the legitimate horse or pet industry. To the extent that we do respect other living things, we elevate ourselves as a people and as a society.

You said you had sent two horses to slaughter and that they "needed to be slaughtered." I don't know whether you meant they needed to be euthanized, or you wanted to punish them. In either case, you would have spared them a lot of suffering if you had simple euthanized them.

John Holland

I just received the following which should make my point about "quality" horses. This lady read the story of the mare we just rescued.
----------------------------------

On your front page, the ASB mare, Starmakers Serenade..is she for sale or is she in her forever home? How much do they need for her? I used to show against that horse all the time up here and was shocked to read her story. She has quite the show record up here in New England!
Jen

Hello. I am a new member to this forum, though I am a long time supported of UAN efforts. I would like to cross post an email I sent to the Yahoo! Group, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HorsePolitics101 I feel it has some merit to this discussion, especially concerning Mary's apparant questions. This post was in response to someone bringing up the AVMA and AAEP's support for the horse slaughter industry.

Also, I would like to point out that ending slaughter will elevate horses above food animals. Pets are HIGHER in the animal social class than food animals. More people seem to care about cruelty to cats and dogs than cruelty to chickens and cows... Just some "food" for thought.

~Barbara

-----------------------------

Your girls here are getting it wrong. This is not reactive... This is progressive change! It's very proactive, just not in the direction those people agree with. We are moving into uncharted territory to help prevent cruelty/abuse, slow unneccessary breeding, and take away an easy outlet for horse thieves.

The reason these groups don't like the idea of stopping horse slaughter in the US is because they fear change. Humans by nature aren't fond of change, some more than others. The cattle industry is afraid stopping horse slaughter will somehow adversly effect their market. The pharmacutical (sp?) industry is affraid it will effect the PMU production negatively. The AQHA is afraid regsitrations will drop, and many of their top members are also cattle ranchers. The vet organizations, well, I have no clue why they would care except for maybe they're in bed with the cow, registry, or pharmacutical folks, or all three.

The only way to help with too much supply is to take away part of the demand. We have already been seeing this happen since 9/11, and it has yet to get a lot better... The economy is down and horses are a luxury item, so the horse market goes down even more. Responsible breeders have been cutting back, or even leaving all of their mares open, for the last few years. This has helped keep the prices of more expensive horses relatively stable, albiet still lower than usual.

Unfortunately, breeders of lower priced animals have yet to catch on! They still have a market and most don't seem to care how low it goes, as long as they're making money. Ending slaughter will help drop the bottom out from under these breeders, traders, and unscrupulous (sp?) auction houses. It will finally drive these money hungry irresponsible people out of the business, or force them to deal in better quality animals that the public will start demanding. They certainly won't keep breeding/trading low quality animals if they're not making any money at it!

I don't understand why this concept is so hard for some people to understand. Yes, the horse industry will be unstable for a time, but supply and demand will work its way out. We will start seeing better quality horses produced since that is where the money will be. The general public will start demanding higher quality animals as well. In the long run, ending slaughter will HELP the horse economy! It will encourage the breeding, buying, selling, and trading of higher quality horses that go for more money.

We're already seeing this trend with show horses. Since the market is down, some breeders are buying mares and stallion services for lines that are winners in the show pen and known for good quality. They research what's winning and what's selling for good prices and try to match that to help their own horses sell. Unfortunately, more irresponsible breeders/traders either don't care, or aren't smart enough to figure that out...

I asked this in another post but has anyone here been involved with this long enough to remember the late 60s and very early 70s? That was when the only real market for weigh horses was the pet food trade. I was a young child then. One neighbor would be get almost free horses to shoot and feed to the hogs, cheaper source of protein than processed feed. I have seen horses tied in road ditches, no water, and legs would in the ropes. They were nearly free and any one who wanted one could have one. I feel if you can't afford to pay more than weigh price for an animal you can't afford to care for it properly anyway.
Beleive me no one is raising slaughter horses at a profit. If you can believe that there is nothing I can say that will make sense.
I didn't say the registered breeders were not at fault, on the contrary they are one of the major problems. There are more quarter horses at the auctions because there are more quarter horses than any other breed. Tell you something about my point about population? I have ridden and sold many good grade horses. Just got done riding one that has more heart and feel than a lot of registered colts I ride. She is not mine but she sure deserves a home.
As I said earlier Mr. Holland you have a just cause and save every one that you can. After reading a little about horse rescue, I can honestly say I have "rescued" more than most people on this site. I don't have a horse mill, it much cheaper for me to buy a prospect than to raise one. I buy the ones that "horselover" bring to the sale underfed, unbroke, feet like dishpans, and dirty for just a hair over scale. They have left under much different circumstances. I just always called it horse trading and making a living, not rescue and rehabilitation. They were nice, well bred horses that had not been cared for.
As for your well intentioned pending law. I can tell you it has already cost one grand old mare her life. There was a very aged mare at the sale I just came from. She was bred to a nice horse, I thought about buying her just for the foal she carried and maybe one more. I didn't because if I couldn't get her back in foal, I would have to bear the cost of putting her down and having her buried or hauled away adding about 300.00 to the price of her foal. I just didn't want to take the risk so I took the easy way out. I let someone else deal with it. Knowing me I would have gotten fond of her anyway and had her put down but I just didn't want to add the expense in my mind from the front end. This is my living not a crusade or a hobby. So I have to look at dollars in and dollars out and that is not always pleasant. My friends and I have been in the livestock industry for more than our lifetimes it is the way we were raised. I don't particularly like to think about how the roast beef sandwhich I had for lunch got here either.
To answer the question would I be ready to send my own horses to slaughter when the time comes. I own two I think enough of to bear the expense of putting them down. They have earned that not by being born horses but because of what they have done for me. Most of my friends feel the same way about some of theirs. The three I did sell were what is known in my part of the country as a suicidal assasin. They will hurt themselves to get to you. They didn't earn the right of respect from me. They were all three registered by the way and I lost my money on them all.
I will now leave you to your rightousness. I just wanted to shed some light from the other side. I am not cruel, thoughtless or ill informed, nor are my friends and associates that share my opinion. We are the ranchers, and horsemen that turn out the nice horses that you use and enjoy. We supply your hamburgers and your steaks. We are the livestock industry. We could do something else but we don't because we love this way of life that the horse has helped us build. We understand and depend on them in ways you can't understand. They not pets and we don't insult by making them that. I have said what I came to say. It will happen with or with out me. I will just continue to do the best I can to care for my horses, and teach the people who come to me for training and lessons to do the same for theirs. That is how I choode to end horse slaughter, not try to legislate animal stewardship. I feel it is the right way. Just as much as the rescues and such take their part in saving the ones you can. I am not here to argue just to state the facts as I see them. I have done that.
Thank you.

Mary

So how do you expect to get people who breed grades to stop breeding so many? Should the government regulate horse breeding? I sure wouldn't want that! The only way to force people to take responsibility is to hit them where it counts, their pocket book.

Barbara,

Thank you for your post explaining how the market will adjust to the absence of slaughter. It was an excellent explanation of what I was alluding too. It is not just theory either. Whenever slaughter has been curtailed you have seen that very reaction. We pride ourselves on living in a free enterprise system, but it seems many of us don't understand how it works.

Mary,

Thank you for sharing your point of view. It looks as if this country is about to abolish horse slaughter so we will soon find out what the effect will be. I would expect about a year of adjustment to the new reality before we will know. While the numbers being slaughtered sound staggering, they only represent about one horse per county in the US per year.

We have had horse slaughter for decades, and it has not helped to solve the problems of abuse and neglect. You made the point yourself that things were much worse back when they were slaughtering huge numbers of horses for dogmeat (horses have not been significantly used in pet food since the 1980s). So it is time see what getting rid of this "necessary evil" will do.

John Holland

If you honestly think people breed horses for slaughter on purpose to make a profit you obviously don't understand economics. If you beleive that maybe you can explain to me how to raise a horse for less 400.00. We have already reached the point of it hitting breeders in the pocket book. Trust me when I say this is the breeders doing it for a profit are not the ones populating the kill floor. Never have been even when scale price was 80 cents. So if you think this law will stop people from breeding unwanted horses I will again point you to the millions of dogs and cats in this country that are destroyed every year because although there is no outlet for they stil continue to be born. Yes, people care about it but it doesn't change the fact the problem still exists. Now the horse is in the same catagory.
As for the cattle industry being worried about it affecting their market how in the world does that make sense? The two have absolutely no connection except that ranchers tend to use horses. The AQHA has been in this deal a long time, they are standing with the opinions of the majority of the people they serve. The loss of registrations has nothing to with the stance they have taken. The AVMA sees the industry from the view of vets that travel up and down the road everyday. The same vets that destroy a lot of the unwanted pets in this country. One would think they would jump on your bandwagon since what you are proposing would create a much greater demand for the drug they use to destroy animals. The point I was trying to make about earlier times was not in the number of horses slaughtered. It was about the lack of value they had. I started this asking for facts. Other than the number of slaughtered horses each year, which by the way seems to change quite a bit depending on the subject at hand. If we are talking about the cruelty of slaughter they are much larger than if we are talking about the effect of the slaughter on the number of unwanted horse there will be if the ban is in place. I find that interesting. And yes we will see. I have been given none. I really hadn't intended to say anything else but when presented with absolute disrespect for the entire livestock industry, I had to answer just once more. No one has answered my original question. How many of you make your living in the horse industry? Now here is new one why do you really think the all the associations who represent the people who do make their living in the livestock industry oppose this? The reasons you have given me for that are just plain not true. As for the question of what will happen to the horses that go to the and don't recieve any bid, well you all neatly dodged that one too.
You are all welcome to your opinion but don't try to tell me I don't understand the industry that won't work. And as I said save all the ones you can. I know I try to. I will say one last thing. I hope you are right about the outcome of this change not to prove anyone right or wrong but for the sake of the horse. As I have said all along I don't want to see the same things happen to unmarketable horses that happens to unwanted pets.
Mary

Mary, I am not foolish enough to try to make my living in the horse industry. I believe I already told you that. It takes too much money to make any money in breeding horses, and unless you have a fortune to invest in the beginning (quality proven horses, land, facilities, marketing), it just doesn't add up to a good living. To be a good trainer, you have to make a name for yourself first, which takes time and money. To be a vet, farrier, or other equine professional, you have to go to school and then make a name for yourself, which takes a lot of time and money.

I am a college instructor, working on my degree, raising a child, and showing my horses. Horses are my hobby and my passion. I put a lot of my time and effort into my own horses and into helping rescues and horse welfare efforts. By having a profession outside of horses, I am able to do more for the good for the horses (IMO and situation).

And why do you care? The horse economy effects us all whether we depend on it for our main income or not.

~Barbara

Barbara,
You have given me false statement after false statement. I posted an ad in my paper on this site. I posted the math about my position, the position of a lot of "fools" that do make their living in the horse industry, in a private forum. I used your figures, an average of them since they do change from time to time. Basically, I was asked "play nice" or leave. I assume play nice means agree. Actually, I was kind of ashamed of myself in so much as it took me six whole days, but then I was out of town for three of them.
I spoke with a friend of mine last evening. She lives in S.D. is a rancher, her husband a farrier. He was raised in Ca., has family there. That is the difference between the statements of me and my friends, we don't have to read about it to form an opinion because we live it. Ca. has the same law you are asking the nation to pass. I think one of you ought to go set up a rescue operation in the Mojave Dessert. Seems some people think that is a humane place to turn unwanted horses loose. Now that's a change for the better, more humane world. Or are you just going to tell that's not true either? So with the ad I posted and the abandonment in the dessert in mind, the times are changing, and you had better get started dealing with the future now. You asked for it and here it is. I didn't ask for and I won't deal with it. It won't be just for awhile either. But take heart, the next time you see a stray dog wandering on the interstate when you drive to work at least in the new changing times he will have the company of a horse. Looks like the humane societies will have to spring for bigger trucks. Just for the record horses are stil commonly used on ranches and for you to state otherwise proves just what little understanding you have not only of the livestock industry but western geography. Since you have called me a fool I feel that I don't really have to be polite any more. It is people like you and the breeders who perpetuate the problems I mentioned in an earlier post that fill the kill pens to begin wtih. I do have more respect for the breeders, however, since they are not trying to get the government to pass a law to solve the problem they helped create. Too many unmarketable horses. Horses that should never have been concieved in the first place since if the supply kept pace with the demand there wouldn't be a problem to argue over. All I wanted to know from the start is what you plan to do with those horses when you can't even give them away. I haven't raised a foal since 1988 by the way. Does that mean I am not a fool?
Mary

Mary,

You asked us to prove that slaughter ending would not increase abuse and neglect, and I gave you many sound historical statistics that make that case. Instead of responding to them you keep changing your complaints.

As to the AVMA, they are a political organization and firmly in league with their biggest single institutional customers the meat industry. The reason that the Senate was not influenced by their lobbiests arguments was that we gave them the facts we had gathered and their aids researched the data for themselves and deduced the truth. They saw that the AVMA had made the same claims in California and that it did not happen. As far as we can determine, the source of your story about horses being turned out in the Mohave desert is Jim Tucker, manager of Cavel, who said in an interview for the local paper that he had heard that. Tucker is a virtual font of misinformation.

In fact, The Horse (a magazine tightly tied to the AVMA) has recently printed an article that was factually wrong in almost every aspect. They stated that the plants could keep operating by hiring their own inspectors (another Tucker creation), and that killer buyers could simple export to drop points in Canada to get around the amendment. They have since printed a retraction, but the misinformation continues to echo around the web. Further, the AVMA will not allow antislaughter or even humane organizations to rent an information booth at their conventions.

Now let me ask you why ending slaughter seems so dire to you. After all, you claim to have only sent two horses to slaughter in your life. That is not a serious financial windfall you are talking about.

Interestingly, your diatribe started just days after the slaughter plants asked all their vendors (read killer buyers) to become active on the net and fight the recent legislation. They gave them talking points, and you have hit all those points.

If you will not tell us who you are in real life (as I have done), then I will now assume you are simply one of these people in disguise and not waste further time in trying to debate your arguments.

John Holland

Very good point John! "She" really could be some killer buyer named Many Johnson! Or maybe a killer buyer's wife? Do they have wives?

~Barbara

<To quote the great white rapper of our time, "Will the real Mary please stand up, please stand up...">