Top Stories of 2011

It's New Year's Eve and the local paper is filled with the top ten stories of the year both locally and globally. The earthquake in Japan, the civil wars in the Middle East, the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the US economy were all top stories. I cringingly have to admit that though all of these emotionally and mentally engaged me when I read about or heard about them in the news, my family and I were affected by none of these huge incidents. Virginia had a teeny earthquake and a teenier drought. My husband and I both have secure jobs, and my family and animals are all healthy. How are so many of us lucky enough to escape the world's turmoil? It is a question that puzzles me when I see photos of starving children and tsunamis engulfing a town.

One of the issues that didn't make the top ten was Congress lifting the ban on horse slaughter in the US. I uploaded this image because it depicts horses that were rescued before they went to Mexican slaughterhouse. In 2010, 138,000 horses were shipped to Mexico and Canada. I did not research this site/blog where the image came from, but I do know that the photos represent the many healthy horses being auctioned and sold for slaughter. The topic is a hot one and elicits much debate with pros and cons on both sides. An article in my local paper on December 11, quotes a woman in my area who wants to be able to butcher old, injured or troublesome horses in order to feed her dogs. The Virginia Horse Council feels that it is better to slaughter horses locally where the process can be regulated instead of shipping them long distances. The organization is also in favor because it hears stories of too many abandoned horses and livestock traders "locking up their trailers at auctions lest they find unwanted horses when they return." Hay prices have doubled in many areas due to drought, and the poor economy, which has made many jobless, has forced people to make a decision about their animals. A healthy, well-trained horse might find a good home. But what about older, less attractive prospects? Euthanizing a horse in VA costs about $200; laws forbid burying your horse on your property so there is then a disposal fee. Even PETA supported the repeal of the ban for slaughter in the US though many animal rights groups are pushing for a total ban on slaughter of horses here and in foreign countries.

I am on the fence. Dogs and cats continue to be abused and abandoned and then put to sleep at shelters because of owners who do not take responsibility, so it is naive to think that if there is a ban on horse slaughter, humans will stop breeding unwanted horses. I know this blog is not the place to discuss any of the top ten issues, nor do I want to get in a huge argument. But in the context of my life, I know I am blessed and lucky to be able to teach, ride, volunteer, garden, read, write and raise a healthy and happy family of humans and animals while too many are not so fortunate.

A Controversial Subject

by Laura Crum

Today’s post is on a controversial subject in many ways, be warned. A lot of you may have strong feelings about this topic. I want to bring it up because its something I think about and wonder what the best answer is. I don’t have a simple solution, but I do have some ideas. And I think they’re worth talking about.

First off, I want to say that one reason I think about this topic as much as I do is because I occasionally read the blog, “Fugly Horse of the Day”. Its listed on the sidebar for those who wish to check it out. And, in fact, I have been reading this blog (and others) more often lately because I am in the midst of churning out my twelfth novel. I am in that particular stage, familiar to all authors, where I must simply generate the bulk of the material. I have a plot and characters and an outline; I have written the oh-so-enjoyable first few chapters. I am about halfway through the book and now I must steadily pour out reams and reams of story (or so it seems to me right now). Those who write novels will understand that this is not always a delightful, joyous, creative occupation. Sometimes it feels like trudging up a steep hill—with a long way to climb ahead. But I must persevere, because I have a deadline looming. So I spend many hours, nose to grindstone, or rather keyboard, typing away. And when I get stuck, or need a break, I have a tendency to click around reading horse blogs. And often, I read the fugly blog.

Now, Fugly is a controversial subject in and of herself. Many of the “horse bloggers” hate her, others love her. Me, I neither hate nor love Cathy, the blogger, nor her blog. I think she does a good job getting a lot of important info out to the public and she is a clever writer—and I also think her heart’s in the right place. This last means I think she is doing her best to reduce the suffering that goes on in the lives of horses and all animals. That said, I disagree with her on many points and I’m not always nuts about her attitude. However, guess what? Its that very attitude that has made her so successful as a blogger—that’s what people read her blog for. They like to hear her bash people. And she’s smart enough to know that. And one of the things that Cathy/Fugly is vehement about is being anti-slaughter.

Since reading the fugly blog I’ve learned a lot about what the slaughter business amounts to right now, and it is all horrific. I am totally anti-slaughter, too, as it exists today. But I think the underlying problem is deeper than Cathy or others who are simply anti-slaughter are willing to consider, and I’d like to put my views forth here and see what you all think.

First off, I am a person who does her best to treat all animals with respect and love. I retire my old horses and euthanise them when their time comes; I am aghast when folks I know take their horses to the sale (to potentially end up going to slaughter), and I tell them so. I have been known to rescue other people’s retirees and give them a home. I love all my animals, and I will allow no harm to be done to the wild animals on my property, including the troublesome ones. So I guess you could say I’m totally on the same page as the anti-slaughter people when it comes to wanting to prevent animal suffering.

I raise my own beef—partly because I want to know I’m eating healthy meat, and partly because I want to know that the steer I’m eating had a good life and a peaceful death. And I do ensure this. My steers live to be 5-7 years old in a big pasture. They are never penned up; they are killed by a professional ranch killer as they stand there grazing. One moment alive, the next gone. No hauling, no feedlot. No suffering.

Now I have had vegetarians tell me that I am evil for killing these steers, and I am a bit puzzled by this. The steers will die in the end. We all do. Death cannot be avoided. Suffering can be avoided—not death. I did not bring the steers into the world—I don’t raise either cattle or horses. By buying these steers, I saved them from a short life and a nasty end. If I let them live a great deal longer, they would simply be faced with the various maladies of old age. Why is it wrong of me to give them a peaceful end to a very good life and eat their meat? I think its win/win. And I honestly think that the best answer to the horse slaughter conundrum is not to ban slaughter but to create a program that is in some ways like the program I have for my steers.

The problem with saying that horse slaughter should disappear and that everyone who no longer wishes to keep a horse and can’t find a buyer should cough up the money to euthanize the horse, or at least shoot it, is that many, many people do not regard horses as pets. Very many people regard horses as livestock, and they do not consider livestock to have any feelings worth considering. I’m not defending this point of view; I’m just saying that its pretty common. Fugly has said that in this society horses are pet animals and should be treated as such, and I think that’s a gray area. We might wish this were so, but historically, in this society, horses were not very often pet animals. They were a means of transport and then a means of making money (racing, horseshows/horse training, trading…etc), and having fun (horse as sporting equipment). It has always been the exception rather than the rule that a horse owner loved his/her animal and took care of them when their working days were done. Given this situation, I think it makes more sense to find a solution that incorporates the point of view that horses are livestock like cattle—something to make money on—rather than pets.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t agree with that view. I love horses and I don’t want to see them suffer. But I know tons and tons of people who do treat horses as if they were cattle, just something to make money on (or sporting equipment—to be got rid of when it doesn’t work any more), and who don’t think that either horses or cattle have “feelings”. The fact that I believe these people are totally wrong (or fugly believes that, or any of us) doesn’t change the way such folks think. And by the way, from their point of view, I treat my cattle as if they were horses.

What if we all just agreed that an unwanted horse is better off dead than suffering and that there is no harm in using his flesh, as long as he is killed humanely. What if there were pastures and ranch killers set aside for this purpose, and there were strict rules as to how the procedures could be done. What if “horse killers” could thus raise “clean” meat such as I raise my steers (by keeping the horses on good pasture and hay for several months) and then sell the humanely killed horses for top dollar to the markets that want such meat. What if they could make a good profit this way?

I think that the horror in horse slaughter comes from the dreadful hauling conditions and feedlot conditions and the equally horrible way in which these horses are killed. There is no horror in a quick painless death while grazing, such as I give my steers. In actual fact, it’s a more reliably peaceful death than euthanasia, when executed by a competent professional. There is no horror in using the meat for food.

So I want to suggest that rather than taking up the somewhat unrealistic position that everyone should regard horses as pets, that all horsemen adopt the position of trying to create a truly humane way to “process” unwanted horses. One that is good for both the horses and the people involved.

And yes, I agree that it’s a shame to kill a young horse that has never had a chance, and if someone can give that horse a chance, more power to them. But starving backyard horses are not getting a life that’s preferable to my proposed slaughter program, in my opinion.

Also, I have not touched at all on the other aspects of this subject, such as people breeding horses for which there is no market, and the harm done by failing to have young horses trained such that they are capable of a useful working life. At the moment, I’m just trying to focus on the one problem. There are many unwanted horses who suffer and their current end through the slaughter industry is horrible. I think we should try to make a positive change and I think my idea makes more sense than banning slaughter. Well, we did ban slaughter and what came of it was just as bad. Horses hauled further, to die in worse conditions. It isn’t working. Lets try something different.

Ok—there’s my ideas on this subject—I’d welcome hearing yours.

The Slaughter Issue, Con't. . . .

by Kit Ehrman
After the last equine slaughter plant in the United States was closed down, the plight of unwanted horses actually became worse, not better. Unwanted animals were hauled even greater distances under appalling conditions to slaughter houses in Canada and Mexico where the process is not as well regulated as it had been in the U.S. The method used in Mexican plants is particularly grisly. As it turned out, a bill that, on the surface, appeared to help horses actually had the unexpected effect of making the end of their lives more brutal.

So, a new bill was introduced that would make the transport of horses for slaughter illegal in the United States. HR 503, the federal Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, would eliminate horse slaughter nationwide and prohibit the export of horses for slaughter. Seemed like a great idea.

The bill stalled.

Meanwhile, with the economy in a downward spiral, poor hay yields, and grain costs escalating along with everything else, the plight of unwanted horses grows more precarious with each passing day. More horses are bound to suffer.

Now, the pendulum is swinging the other way. Twelve state legislatures are considering measures to support or actively encourage the reestablishment of U.S. horse processing plants.

Resolutions opposing the HR 503 bill are either under consideration or have passed in:
Arizona
Kansas
Minnesota
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming

Bills amending state law to promote slaughter plant development are pending in:
Arkansas
Illinois
Missouri
Montana
Tennessee

This about face was engineered by Wyoming State Representative Sue Wallis and South Dakota State Representative Dave Sigdestad in a resolution submitted to the National Sate Legislatures Agriculture and Energy Committee with the intent of generating jobs and addressing the issue of unwanted horses.

And that is the issue, really – unwanted horses. The key here is for each and every horse owner to think long and hard before breeding their animals.

The racing industry, in particular, is at fault in this regard as they seem to need to produce a whole lot of horses to come up with winners, but at least they are taking measures to curtail abuse in their own backyard.

Magna Entertainment Group has adopted a company-wide policy promoting the humane treatment of racehorses. Any trainer or owner stabling horses at one of their tracks who directly or indirectly participates in the transport of a horse to a slaughterhouse or auction house that sells horses for slaughter will be prohibited from having stalls at the track. Having stalls onsite is a big deal, so this is definitely a deterrent.

Magna Entertainment Group tracks:
Golden Gate Fields; Albany, Calif.
Gulfstream Park; Hallandale Beach, Fla.
Laurel Park; Laurel, Md.
Lone Star Park at Grand Prairie; Grand Prairie, Texas
The Meadows; Meadow Lands, Pa.
Pimlico; Baltimore, Md.
Portland Meadows; Portland, Ore.
Remington Park; Oklahoma City, Okla.
Santa Anita Park; Arcadia, Calif.
Thistledown; North Randall, Ohio

Suffolk Downs also has a zero tolerance policy. Track management will deny trainers stalls if they sell a horse for slaughter. They’ve also partnered with the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation and CANTER and have set aside ten stalls for horses that need care until they can be moved to a farm or retirement facility.

Finger Lakes Racetrack has its own horse farm and adoption program. Visit the link: http://www.fingerlakestap.org.

Legislation isn’t going to save horses. It’s up to each horseman to make smart decisions and take responsibility for their horses.

They give us so much. It’s our job to look after them.

Happy reading and riding,
Kit

http://www.kitehrman.com

After the Finish Line . . .

by Kit Ehrman

Today’s post will be short since I’m away from home, using a hotel Internet that’s extraordinarily slow.

In light of the recent topic here, regarding responsible horse ownership and the fate of horses that are no longer wanted, I’d like to draw your attention to After the Finish Line, a website dedicated to caring for racehorses once they’ve left the track. Please visit www.afterthefinishline.org/index.htm.

The tragic deaths of 2006 Kentucky Derby winner Barbaro and this year’s second place finisher, filly Eight Belles, brought the plight of racehorses and, ultimately, the whole slaughter issue to the forefront. Thankfully, changes are being made.

At Suffolk Downs in Boston, sending racehorses to slaughter will no longer be tolerated. Track management will deny stalls to any trainer who sells a horse for slaughter. It’s great to see that the industry is taking action. Certainly, there’s much to be done, but it’s a start.

What’s needed even more, I believe, is for backyard horse owners to be educated, to stop mindless breeding of their stock, to make sure their horses are well-trained and socialized, and to take responsibility for their fates.

The Fate of a Horse

By Laura Crum


As the author of ten mysteries featuring equine veterinarian Gail McCarthy, I’ve done plenty of writing about horses in my life. But until I was invited to participate in this blog by its founders, back in March of this year, I had never written a blog, or, for that matter, read one. So, for the last few months I’ve been reading various “horse blogs”, trying to find out what it is I’m supposed to be doing here, exactly. From what I’ve read so far, there seems to be great variety; some blogs are essentially just personal diaries, others have a particular theme…etc. The most popular one I’ve stumbled upon (judging by the number of comments) is essentially a rant against horses going to slaughter—also addressing the various reasons horses end up going to slaughter, including poor breeding and training practices as well as the basic inhumanity and stupidity of many in the horse industry. Now I agree with this gal’s opinions more often than not, though I’m not nuts about the “diatribe” format. I admit it can be entertaining to read her rants (must be why she gets so many readers). Still, the main point of “Fugly Horse of the Day”, as I see it, is how we as ethical horse owners can do the best for the horses in our care. And one question arises for me over and over again, which I would like to pose to the regulars on "fugly horse" (and anyone else who reads this blog); a question that really bothers me, and I welcome any insights offered
.
I’ve owned horses all my life; I’ve trained horses, competed for years, rescued other people’s horses and retired them, retired my old horses…etc. I currently maintain eleven horses, only four of which we ride. One of the main things I have learned, after thirty-five years of owning, riding and training horses, is that if you truly care about the ultimate fate of a horse you have to retain ownership of said horse. And you have to check on the horse regularly if its placed with another caregiver. Even if that caregiver seems absolutely perfect in every way. (I could tell you stories.)

I have never had the experience of a horse that I retained ownership of coming to a bad end, but there were some situations that could have worked out that way if I had not owned the horse and checked on the horse regularly. The only horses I ever owned that may have had a sad fate were those I sold. And I never sold any horse that was not sound and well-trained (within the parameters of that individual—like people, some horses just have easier personalities than others). I have always tried to sell only to people I knew, who I believed were responsible, but the truth is, when you sell a horse you lose control of that horse. If the new owner decides to sell the horse, he/she can do that, and doesn’t need to consult you first (even if they promise you that they will). Once they have a bill of sale and you have the money, they have control of that horse’s fate.

At this point in my life, I’ve pretty much given up selling horses; if I take a horse on I’m responsible for its fate, and I take that seriously. Which is why I have eleven horses, only four of which are our riding horses. The others? Horses I owned who got injured or became lame or just got old and are now happily retired. Two horses that didn’t really fit me and are now being cared for and ridden by others (and are checked on regularly). One horse that I rescued many years ago and had to take away from the home where I placed him (which for many years worked well), when the horse got old enough that he couldn’t keep his weight on and the people who had him were unwilling/unable to fork out the money for the diet of “equine senior delight” that he needed. This horse now lives with my retired horses and is slick and happy. In fact, all my eleven horses are healthy and happy today, within the parameters of who they are.

The horses I feel sad about are the ones I sold. Now, I did not sell these horses when their using days were done. No, the horses I sold were all young, sound, and reasonably well-trained. And when I sold them, I thought I was selling them to good homes. But in some cases (not all) the horse eventually changed hands, and one at least did end up at the livestock auction, as I found out later.

No, this horse did not go to the killer buyers. At least not when I heard of her. Because she was a young, sound, pretty mare, well-bred, with papers, and broke to ride, she got bought by a local horse trader and sold to be a riding horse. He told me about this later (my name was listed on the papers as a previous owner—I was not the breeder), which is how I found out. I have no idea what caused her to end up at the auction in the first place.

To be honest, I’m not sure what I could/should have done differently. Lets face it, I sold these horses for a reason. One and all, they didn’t fit me; they weren’t the ones I wanted to keep and take care of forever. But I did want them to have good homes and I thought I had sold them to such. Thus I no longer sell the ones that don’t fit me; I place them in homes where they fit (and I check on them). But at the time I sold these other horses, I couldn’t afford this luxury.

I still wonder what happened to some of these horses I sold; I have nightmares about them ending up on trucks to the killers. At one time I owned them and was fond of them and agonized over their health and training. I certainly always wanted the best for them. Is the answer that one can never sell a horse? What is the ethical horse owner to do faced with this situation: I bought this horse, he doesn’t fit me, and I don’t really want to be his forever home. I want to give forever homes to horses I truly love and admire (and there are always more of these in the world than I can ever give homes to). It is a tough question, or at least I think so. I wish I knew what the right answer is/was. Thanks for your insights.

Laura Crum

http://www.lauracrum.com/