This is the best site I've ever found for the 'pro-slaughter' side of this controversy:
http://www.commonhorsesense.com/index.html
I had posted this article from the Livestock Weekly a few months ago. It tells a little bit more about the origins of the commonhorsesense site. I highlighted the quote at the end. Pretty well sums up the opposition...
Opponents Becoming More Active
In Battle Over Horse Slaughter
By John Bradshaw
WASHINGTON — The debate over horse slaughter for human consumption continues, and supporters of the ban appear to be more active than those who oppose it. A simple Internet search will show an overwhelming number of anti-slaughter sites.
Opponents of the ban are beginning to awaken, however.
Leslie Gwinn operates www.commonhorsesense.com here in Washington, D.C. This website contains information pertaining to the ban as well as information on contacting Congressional representatives and a sign-up to receive e-mail updates on the issue.
The website was originally a clearinghouse for information for the Horse Welfare Coalition, the more than 200 organizations that oppose the ban, but the large amount of public support soon forced them to adapt.
"We found that it was really a valuable tool. People started e-mailing us, wanting more information and wanting to know how they could get involved. So, we implemented this grassroots campaign and the sign-up in January. People can get updates on the issue via e-mail, and we put a lot of material and articles on there so that people have access to the most updated information," says Gwinn.
There has been a large increase in the number of sign-ups in the last month, and particularly the last week.
"I guess this is because there is starting to be some action in Congress. The bill is advancing and people are starting to realize that this is getting serious and that they need to do something," says Gwinn.
The Senate Committee on Commerce recently voted to send S 311 to the Senate floor. All three U.S. plants (two in Texas and one in Illinois) are currently shut down by state law.
According to Gwinn, the best thing for the ban's opponents to do is contact their Congressmen and pass on their opinions and reasoning. "They are the ones who control the fate of the industry."
Gwinn also advises writing to local newspapers and discussing the issue. "The more people are talking about it and discussing what is going to happen if these plants close for good, the better off we'll be.
"A lot of people feel that the animal rights folks behind this legislation aren't even horse owners, which is frustrating because they don't even understand the industry. They just see videos that are outdated and old and not even taken at the plants that are currently operating in the United States," says Gwinn.
"If you were to see those videos and are not used to seeing what goes on at a slaughter plant it would be very alarming to you. The fact is, if you haven't been in a beef slaughter plant or a swine slaughter plant, it's not a pretty picture, but it is a reality. Animal rights people see these videos and are disgusted, but it's one of the most regulated practices in the agriculture industry.
"So, it's frustrating when people who don't even know about the industry and don't know about horses are speaking out about this and they really have no place, and that's where a lot of these small websites and blogs are coming from," says Gwinn.
Commonhorsesense.com has received plenty of feedback, some of it appreciative and some not. "I've gotten letters from people who say that they were against horse slaughter but saw the website and recognized that slaughter was an important part of the industry and thanking me for providing some balance. I've also gotten death threats from people who think that I'm insane."
Charlie Stenholm, a former Congressman from Texas who is the spokesman for the Horse Welfare Coalition, also believes that slaughter proponents should become more active.
"Anybody can keep up with this issue by going to commonhorsesense.com. We need more people to look at this site and criticize it, constructively we hope, and help us tell the story better.
"The other side has had absolute and total access to the press, and it matters not what they tell the press; they get their stories told. The good news is that we're now picking up the non-agriculture press, and we've never had trouble with the ag press. The non-agriculture press is now beginning to pick up and to tell the whole story," says Stenholm.
"We think that the more we can get the truth out, the better."
This has been a frustrating battle, according to Stenholm, both for himself and for the Horse Welfare Coalition. "First off, it's emotional, and I understand that. But, by the same token, so many people couldn't believe that the federal government is going to pass a law telling me how and when I can sell my horse. They're going to force me to do what the activists want me to do when I know that it's not the most humane way to deal with my horse. But, because the activists believe that they know what is best, there's going to be a law that dictates what I can do with my private property. Surely, you must be kidding."
Stenholm hopes members of Congress will hear from enough livestock owners, horse owners in particular, who are being affected negatively by this. "We need enough of the members of Congress who continually vote against us on this to understand that this is not a simple vote, and it is not something that is simply humane versus inhumane."
The bill, S 311, is a bipartisan endeavor, Stenholm says, and many Senators may be worried about being labeled as horse killers. "You ought to read some of the e-mails I get."
Stenholm believes that the anti-slaughter folks have been more active because there is much emotion on their part, and they have more money.
The Humane Society of the United States, according to Stenholm, has a $110 million budget. "Only a very small percentage of that budget is spent for the welfare of animals, and a whole lot of it is being spent on political races across the country, electing people who agree with them on all of their agendas. That's what we call freedom to express yourself under the Constitution of the United States. We just want to be sure that what they're saying is the truth, and they've been kind of shading that just a little. We appreciate the opportunity to set the record straight, which we do every chance we get."
A blessing in disguise, says Stenholm, is that all three U.S. plants are shut down at this time. "All of the things that we were trying to tell people would happen are now happening.
"We've been on the losing end of this politically and emotionally, but more and more people are beginning to see the unintended consequences.
"It's having a very adverse affect on a very important industry, the horse industry of the United States," continued Stenholm. "We're talking about an industry that has a direct economic impact of about $40 billion annually; indirectly that's about $102 billion. There's about 400,000 fulltime jobs, and the whole industry is being affected negatively."
The first people to feel the negative affects, says Stenholm, were the horse auctions. Auction owners have been in Washington this past week speaking to Congress about the problems.
"We're told now that the value has dropped a hundred or two hundred dollars on all horses. On nine million horses in the United States, that's getting close to $2 billion. The processing plant was the floor bidder, but that is now nonexistent," explained Stenholm.
The recent plant closures cost American Airlines tremendously, Stenholm says, because they shipped the meat overseas. "Twenty employees from American Airlines lost their jobs because they were fully employed shipping horse meat."
Horse meat is not the delicacy that some would lead you to believe, says Stenholm, but a staple of a lot of diets in Europe and Asia.
Stenholm advises those who wish to make horses into pets to be careful what they wish for. "Pets are not deductible."
Stenholm believes that some of the activists are hypocritical in their thinking.
"The hypocrisy is that the same people who are fighting horse slaughter are the same people who are fighting to eliminate zoos, eliminate circuses, eliminate rodeos and eliminate horse racing.
"I find it very interesting that it is inhumane to put wild animals in pens, but it is perfectly humane to put wild horses and burros in pens and keep them there all of their natural life. There is a certain amount of hypocrisy there," says Stenholm.
"Take T. Boone Pickens, for example. Here is a man who has done extremely well in private enterprise. He has bought a lot of land in West Texas. He believes that the water that's under his land belongs to him. It's amazing to me that he can take the position that my horse doesn't belong to me. It's totally inconsistent in philosophy."
Many in the livestock industry worry that this ban will lead to more regulations beyond just horses. Stenholm says there is no question about that.
"You only have to look around at what is happening to caged laying hens around the country. You have to look at attempts to make all kinds of changes in the manner in which we raise our animals for human consumption. These folks have a different opinion than we do."
Both Texas Senators, John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, are on record against the ban, Stenholm says. "We'd appreciate it if supporters would drop them a note, and I'm sure that those who don't agree will be dropping them a different note."
Not all horse owners oppose the ban, Stenholm says, and he respects that. "It has been difficult on these organizations in the Coalition. It's tough on them when they've got 10 or 15 percent of the members who feel very strongly against slaughter. The rest of the members disagree but think, 'Well, I'm just not going to get involved.'"
All of the members of the Horse Welfare Coalition believe that all animals should be treated humanely from birth until death. "That's not a debatable point. What is debatable is that there are different definitions of what is humane and what is not," says Stenholm.
"To those who oppose us on this, we continually ask them to look at the three acceptable ways of euthanizing a horse. One is the captive bolt gun, which is used in the slaughter plants under the supervision of veterinarians.
"The second is a bullet, which has to be done in a non-populous area," advised Stenholm.
"The third is an overdose of barbiturates or chemicals. You can ask any vet and they'll tell you that that is not the most humane way to end a horse's life. Again, there is emotion involved in this, and the Humane Society of the United States and PETA and others have a different opinion in all of this.
"We think that if you're on the side of the horses, you should be on our side, not their side," emphasized Stenholm.
"No matter how many times they run the ads about the inhumane treatment in our plants, it's simply not true.
"No matter how many times they talk about horses being transported in double-deck trailers, it's not true. That's illegal. We've got truckers all over the country who have made tremendous investments in trailers that are legal to transport horses to slaughter. You can transport horses anywhere that you want in the country in any kind of vehicle, but not to slaughter.
"No matter how many times they talk about stolen horses, it's not true. When horses show up at the slaughter facility, brands are checked, tattoos are checked, and color markings are checked. It is reasonable to expect that if you report your horse stolen it will be satisfied and you can come get your horse," says Stenholm.
"I believe, as sincerely as I can, that the horses of America will be more humanely treated if we can maintain slaughter for human consumption under the supervision of a veterinarian as a legal business in the United States.
"And to anybody that reads something that I say and they think, 'Well, that wasn't the truth, Charlie,' then I'd like for them to point it out."
Recently in Lubbock a woman who is actively anti-slaughter was asked why she will not believe the horse experts when they say that horse slaughter is necessary. Her response was, "Well, I'm a typical activist. This is my opinion and I don't care what the facts are."
==========================================
Good luck with your paper, Futurevet. You're obligated to share it with us now. :wink:
fficial&client=firefox-a
