SHOULD THE FUNDING FOR U.S. FEDERAL INSPECTIONS
ON HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER BE REESTABLISED?
INTRODUCTION There are 9.2 million horses being used for sports, shows, and recreation in the United States (American Horse Council). While horses have always been seen as tool to complete ranch or farm work and a type of transportation, the more personal use of horses in recent years is their role as a companion animal. However, not everyone can afford these expensive pets and thousands are left unwanted each year. Before 2006, these horses would be should through auction houses to kill buyers and hauled to a U.S. slaughter facility. After the last slaughter facility closed in September 2007, the abundance of unwanted horses has caused a diluted …show more content…
Proponents and opponents of horse slaughter both have strong and emotional reasons for their opinions, but both want what is best for the beloved, historic animal, the horse.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND INDUSTRY BACKGROUND Federal inspection standards were set forth in the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996; better known as The 1996 Farm Bill. The bill included that horses intended to be slaughtered were to be checked at assembly points, feedlots, stockyards, and once they reached the slaughter facility (USGAO 2011). In 2006, the funding for these inspections was withheld by the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act (Geyer and Lawler 2015). This created a de facto ban on slaughter houses. However, the three facilities that were still operating in 2006 were all foreign owned and felt these rules should not apply to them. They petitioned the United States Department of …show more content…
170 jobs were lost after the closure of the three facilities. While the number is small, these jobs were detrimental to the small, rural communities surrounding the facilities. In 2006, only three facilities generated $65 million in exports and it is expected if facilities were reopened, this amount would increase due to the surplus of unwanted horses (Geyer and Lawler 2015). Currently, there are 130,000 to 170,000 unwanted horses in the U.S. each year (Schueler 2015). These horses are left to either be abused and neglected or sent to slaughter plants in Canada or Mexico. While 44% of horses are sent to humane regulated slaughter houses in Canada, the other 56% mostly find themselves in Mexico at local butcher shops. These shops use the puntilla knife method to slaughter horses. This method includes the repeated stabbing of the horse’s necks until the spinal cord is severed. This leaves the horse still conscious during the slaughter process, unlike the humane captive bolt gun method used in Canada and the United States (Geyer and Lawler 2015). The following quote is from Livestock Slaughter Expert Dr. Temple Grandin in a questioning about animal welfare during horse
ON HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER BE REESTABLISED?
INTRODUCTION There are 9.2 million horses being used for sports, shows, and recreation in the United States (American Horse Council). While horses have always been seen as tool to complete ranch or farm work and a type of transportation, the more personal use of horses in recent years is their role as a companion animal. However, not everyone can afford these expensive pets and thousands are left unwanted each year. Before 2006, these horses would be should through auction houses to kill buyers and hauled to a U.S. slaughter facility. After the last slaughter facility closed in September 2007, the abundance of unwanted horses has caused a diluted …show more content…
Proponents and opponents of horse slaughter both have strong and emotional reasons for their opinions, but both want what is best for the beloved, historic animal, the horse.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND INDUSTRY BACKGROUND Federal inspection standards were set forth in the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996; better known as The 1996 Farm Bill. The bill included that horses intended to be slaughtered were to be checked at assembly points, feedlots, stockyards, and once they reached the slaughter facility (USGAO 2011). In 2006, the funding for these inspections was withheld by the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act (Geyer and Lawler 2015). This created a de facto ban on slaughter houses. However, the three facilities that were still operating in 2006 were all foreign owned and felt these rules should not apply to them. They petitioned the United States Department of …show more content…
170 jobs were lost after the closure of the three facilities. While the number is small, these jobs were detrimental to the small, rural communities surrounding the facilities. In 2006, only three facilities generated $65 million in exports and it is expected if facilities were reopened, this amount would increase due to the surplus of unwanted horses (Geyer and Lawler 2015). Currently, there are 130,000 to 170,000 unwanted horses in the U.S. each year (Schueler 2015). These horses are left to either be abused and neglected or sent to slaughter plants in Canada or Mexico. While 44% of horses are sent to humane regulated slaughter houses in Canada, the other 56% mostly find themselves in Mexico at local butcher shops. These shops use the puntilla knife method to slaughter horses. This method includes the repeated stabbing of the horse’s necks until the spinal cord is severed. This leaves the horse still conscious during the slaughter process, unlike the humane captive bolt gun method used in Canada and the United States (Geyer and Lawler 2015). The following quote is from Livestock Slaughter Expert Dr. Temple Grandin in a questioning about animal welfare during horse