Common Myths and Misconceptions

Here are the most common arguments presented in the case for slaughter. Beneath each point I will conclude with what the actual facts state, all verifiable with links to the source.


Argument 1: There is an overwhelming population of "unwanted" horses. Slaughter is the best solution to this problem.

With the recent econimic downturn, horse breeders, particularly those who breed in quantity, have come under increasing scrutiny for their continued breeding in a down market, while many of them actively lobby for slaughter to subsidize their continued breeding. The AQHA, who is actively lobbying for horse slaughter, particularly stands to profit, as 70% of horses shipped to Canada for slaughter are quarter horses. read article here Clearly, the push for reinstating slaughter is about making money through breeding more horses for slaughter, and not a humane act of kindness to "cull the herd" of overpopulation.

Also, if there were such a surplus of horses, why were American slaughter plants importing horses from Canada for slaughter? The following shows the number of horse imports for slaughter:

2005 - 7,865 horses were imported to the US for slaughter
2006 - 4,022 horses were imported to the US for slaughter
2007 - 2,488 horses were imported to the US for slaughter
(PDF)

That's 14,375 horses in only 3 years. Why import that many horses if there is already a surplus in the US?

There is absolutely no call for horse meat in America. That is because the majority of Americans do not consider horses meat animals. The USDA reports that 90% of the horse meat slaughtered in the US was exported overseas, while the remaining 10% was sent to zoos.

80% of American voters disagree with the notion of slaughtering US horses for human consumption.

Argument 2: Each year, thousands of horses are crammed into trailers and shipped to Canada and Mexico for slaughter, where they are subjected to horrific conditions. Therefore, it is far more humane to slaughter them here in the USA.

Yes, there is horrific abuse which goes on in the processing plants across our borders, and even in the exporting of horses for slaughter. But there is documented evidences of horrific abuse which also occured here in the US before the plants were prohibited from slaughtering horses. These abuses include horses being alive during dismemberment, horses being whipped in the face by plant employees, mares giving birth on the killing floors. The USDA recently released horrific and incredibly graphic photos of injured horses with protruding bones, hanging eyeballs, and open wounds, all taken at US slaughter houses. Whether inside or outside of our country, horses should not be subjected to this horrific abuse.

Most importantly, the method which was used in the US (and currently in Canada), using the "captive bolt" method of stunning the animal by penetrating the skull with a bolt was designed and created for cattle. Because of the differences in the behavior and physiology of horses, (horses have a stronger flight drive and therefore struggle more than cattle, also the thickness of horses skulls is much greater than cattle, and the fact that their brain sets further back than in cattle) this method has a very high inaccuracy rate in rendering horses unconscious. In fact, this method of "stunning" has an efficacy rate of 60%, meaning that nearly half of the horses horses are repeatedly bludgeoned in the head (some times as much as 11 or more), and many are then sent through the rest of the process alive, and fully conscious. For this very reason the "captive bolt" system is rarely used in the UK.

Argument 3: Without slaughter plants, horse abuse and neglect will rise.

There is absolutely no documented proof of a link between owner abuse and neglect of horses and the closure of the US slaughter plants. In fact, some of the polls and stats seem to show just the opposite.

http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/541
http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/features/horseslaughter-123.shtml

In California, where slaughter was banned in 1998, there has been no corresponding rise in cruelty and neglect cases. In Illinois, when the plant was shut down for two years, horse neglect and cruelty decreased in the state.

There is, however, a direct relationship between the presence of a slaughter house and horse theft. Horses have been illegally sold to auctions, where they are then sold to kill buyers for slaughter. The 1998 ban on commercial export of horses for slaughter in California resulted in 34% drop in horse theft (California Livestock and Identification Bureau).

In 2001, during the mad cow scare in europe, the Texas and Southwest Cattle Raisers Association saw an increase in horse theft by over 50%. (PDF)

Argument 4: The horse slaughter industry would provide a much-needed boost for the economy.

Prior to 2007 there were three major plants in operation in the US- Dallas Crown, Inc. in Kaufman, TX; Beltex Corporation in Fort Worth, TX; and Cavel International, Inc. in DeKalb, IL - all with Belgian ownership, although Multimeat NW has been listed as French and Dutch owned. Combined, they exported $42 million worth of meat each year, with the majority of that going to the foreign-owned exporters overseas.

During this time, the US government was spending $5 million in federal funding each year for FDA inspections of all 3 plants.

According to released tax records, Dallas Crown, Inc. Earned a gross profit of $12 million. How much did they pay in taxes? A grand total of $5. click here to view the actual tax document

These plants employed only a few dozen workers, see here, and plagued the surrounding communities with unsanitary conditions. In 2007, the two operating facilities in tx were ordered closed following retracted battles with their local municipalities who voiced objections over the slaughter houses' financial drain on the municipalities without providing tax revenue, as well as ditches of blood, dismembered foals, and reek of offal and waste in residential neighborhoods. Read this letter from former mayor Paula Bacon.