The Yays Passed Horsemeat Ban, but Time Shows the Neighs Had It

When the federal ban on inspecting facilities that process horsemeat took shape several years ago, pretty much no one could have predicted the terrible unintended consequences of the ban now being reported in the Washington Times:

Congress imposed a back-door ban on horse slaughter in 2006 to try to improve humane conditions, but a new government report says it has backfired and the same horses are now being exported for slaughter in Canada and Mexico, and they likely are suffering more along the journey.

Actually, maybe someone could have predicted these consequences. And they did, as the title of a 2006 report, The Unintended Consequences of a Ban on the Humane Slaughter (Processing) of Horses in the United States, makes clear. That report predicted, among other problems, that "[t]he potential for a large number of abandoned or unwanted horses is substantial."

The title of the just-issued report that is the subject of the Times article, by the GAO, is Horse Welfare: Action Needed to Address Unintended Consequences from Cessation of Domestic Slaughter. It lays bare the problems caused by the ban. Analysis of the report by the agricultural publication Feedstuffs shows

U.S. horses intended for slaughter are now traveling significantly greater distances to reach their final destination, where they are not covered by U.S. humane slaughter regulations. GAO noted that USDA currently has authority to regulate only the transportation of horses to slaughter plants, but there are none in the U.S.

With the effects now known, GAO is recommending that Congress reconsider the ban.

Not content to wait for the ban to be lifted at the federal level, New Hampshire legislators have passed a bill—currently awaiting the governor's signature—to permit intra-state slaughter and consumption of horse.

Baylen Linnekin is a lawyer and the executive director of Keep Food Legal, a nonprofit that promotes culinary freedom, the idea that people should be free to make and consume whatever commestibles they prefer. For more information and to join or donate, go here now.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Mister Ed||

    The horror. The horror.

  • ||

    Did an anonymous horse write this article?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You're not a real Reason contributor until the first time you forget to sign your post.

  • Baylen Linnekin||

    Dammit!

  • GILMORE||

    The preferred nomenclature is, "Doh!"

  • ||

    A deer?

  • jtuf||

    Mmmmm, deer.

  • Male Deer||

    Female deer! Whoo hoo!

  • Anonymous Horse||

    No. But I'm pretty weirded out learning about the getting-eaten part. I'm kicking the next person I see in the nuts.

  • sevo||

    If you see them in the nuts, why would you bother?

  • SIV||

    I linked this early today. I'm happy to see Reason finally post it.

  • SIV||

    Go New Hampshire!

    Eat cheval or die.

  • Mainer||

    god DAM I feel so proud that I moved to the Granite State. Next we get rid of our Democrat governor and then there'll be freedom splattered all over the walls.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Despite my unmovable anti-slaughter stance, that splattered all over the walls was funny.

  • SIV||

  • Hugh Akston||

    Somewhere Aresen is crying a single tear.

    Possibly as he pushes a horse flank through a band saw.

  • ||

    Not at all.

    I may be a horseman, but I have always been aware of the miserable fate of neglected and abandoned horses (and other domestic animals.) Far kinder to send them to a slaughterhouse for a relatively quick death than slow starvation or other neglect.

  • SIV||

    I don't understand the opposition to putting horse to their final use. I understand it can be sad for the actual horse owner (like putting a dog down), but c'mon, does anyone want to let all that useful biomass go to waste? there's meat and Jello and glue and upholstery stuffing and paint brushes to be had! Wouldn't Flicka, Misty, Stormy, Silver,Pie, Trigger, etc want it that way? Offering their final service to Man?
    Secretariat or Mr. Ed might deserve a giant hole and a granite marker but we can't be taking up all our valuable finite real estate with horse cemeteries.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    SIV, humanely putting a dog down has absolutely nothing in common with slaughter of horses. It is NOT humane because they use transport, equipment and techniques expressly developed for cattle. They are totally unsuitable for horses either physically or mentally. Got that?

    And, there's that problem of toxic residues in horses - and dogs for that matter.

  • T||

    Cue up the indignant horse lovers. At least that's what happened last time we all expressed the opinion that maybe, just maybe, the government shouldn't be involved in the issue.

  • jtuf||

    Yeah, they are such kindomists. Plants have rights too.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    You, T and Jtuf, you have no knowledge of this situation. So, it would be prudent to knock off the sarcasm because it might come back to you sometime.

    The meat industry proved long ago that the Feds have to be involved. Ever read The Jungle by Sinclair Lewis? You really should.

  • Baylen Linnekin||

    You... have no knowledge of this situation. So, it would be prudent to knock off the sarcasm because it might come back to you sometime.

    Or back to you, Suzanne. Pedantry is not an admirable trait.

    No one's read "The Jungle" by Sinclair Lewis, because Sinclair Lewis never authored a book by that name. Perhaps, Suzanne, you meant to refer to "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair? If you did, you failed again. It's a novel, which is by definition a work of fiction.

    Even if your argument were not otherwise fatally flawed, the government involvement in the meat industry you refer to (in referencing "The Jungle") did not result in the banning of horse or other meat that you call for above but, rather, in increased regulation of meat slaughter. Regulated slaughter of horses is exactly what the lifting of the current federal horsemeat processing ban would accomplish.

  • ||

    They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

  • ||

    Its ok to kill an animal, just don't eat it.

  • jtuf||

    Exactly. Random slaughter isn't a problem. Deriving benefit from slaughter freaks statists out. Congress forbid we selfishly satisfy our urge to eat by slaughtering a horse.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    God Almighty! You just can't understand Man, I'd hate to be that dumb. I mean, what's so hard to understand about inhumane slaughter and toxic drug residue in the meat?

  • Suzanne Moore||

    You must be Lost_In_Translation - or just plain lost. It's the KILLING in a barbaric, horrific manner that's the problem. The eating afterward is not the point - the horse can't suffer any more. But the people who eat the toxic meat certainly can. But, you seem to be too dense and/or arrogant to understand any of that. At least you act like you are.

  • ||

    I have to admit...this is a brilliant PR tactic.

    It makes it a lot harder to convince people that we should be worried about unforeseen consequences--when the government can't even mange to avoid the clearly foreseen consequences!

    It's like the government's become so incompetent, it's all but made libertarian arguments irrelevant. Why argue about what the government should do?

    That's living in a dream world! A dream world, where the government doesn't do stupid things--if it knows stupid things are stupid ahead of time!

    In the real world, the government just doesn't work like that.

    How dumb do you have to be to think our government is the solution to any of our problems?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    How dumb do you have to be to think our government is the solution to any of our problems?

    But the government IS the solution to all of our problems! All we need is for the right people to be in charge and the government becomes a real-world Philosopher's Stone. Then, led by the right people, the country, and the world will become a utopia.

    Or some shit like that.

  • ||

    Yeah, the problem is that the right party isn't in charge.

    Unless it's my favorite party in charge. Then the problem is that the opposition has tricked the American people into thinking that the party in charge is the cause of their problems.

    We should all start doing our patriotic duty--and stop voting to legitimatize these clowns.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Can't people talk about ANYTHING without making it political? I'm very apolitical and I'm sick of it. We're discussing horses, at least we're supposed to be.

  • Trespassers W||

    My friend Bob Sacamano eats horse all the time.

  • Warty||

    What's horse taste like? I'd like to try some.

  • Butts Wagner||

    I ate donkey unknowingly once. Not too bad. I would liken what I ate to pot roast.

  • SIV||

    Horse meat was also eaten as part of Germanic pagan religious ceremonies in northern Europe, particularly ceremonies associated with the worship of Odin.

    Nah, you wouldn't like it.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Horses didn't have Phenylbutazone in their systems then.

  • ||

    It's very similar to beef. I had a few meals of viande de cheval in France.

    It was very tasty.

  • Xmas||

    I had some in Switzerland. It was covered with a pepper sauce, so I couldn't comment on the flavor. It was a little bit stronger tasting than beef over there. It was a bit gristly though.

  • SIV||

    According to wiki, two cantons in Switzerland enjoy air dried smoked dog ham.

  • Bar Student||

    I had dog in Shanghai, it wasn't particularly tasty or all that different than all the stir-fried chicken (which for all I know was also dog or cat).

  • Zeb||

    I liked it. Mostly like beef, but sweeter and surprisingly tender when I had it. I had sort of assumed that horse muscle would be tough and sinewy.

  • ||

    I had sort of assumed that horse muscle would be tough and sinewy.

    Avoid racehorses and drafthorses.

  • ||

    I'm partial to the ponies myself. With some nice hollandaise sauce.

  • Warty||

    Oh, yes, how silly of me.

    Man: "Get your piping hot horse burgers horse fries, horse cakes and shakes. We got tongue, straight from the horse's mouth."
    Leela: "Hmm."
    Hermes: "It all sounds good."
    Man: "All our horses are 100% horse-fed for that double-horse "juiced-in" goodness."
    Leela: "I'll have the cholesterol-free omelet with horse-beaters."
    Man: "And you, Sir? How can I horse you?"
    Hermes: "I'll have a horse Coke."
    Man: "Horse Pepsi okay?"
    Hermes: "Nay."

  • ||

    It's not as if the logic of the marketplace will ensure that the horses don't get exported for inhumane slaughter once the ban is lifted.

    If the U.S. requires more-expensive humane slaughter, but the neighboring jurisdictions allow cheaper inhumane slaughter, the horses may still be exported for slaughter. (Might depend on transportation costs.)

    The only totally "Libertarian" solution would be to forego all government control, including control over the conditions of slaughter, so that U.S. slaughterers could "race to the bottom" established in Canada and Mexico.

    If horses are "property," the only protection Libertarians would afford them is whatever they would get from human buyers willing to pay more voluntarily in order to have horse parts from a humane-slaughter source.

    This is just one more example of the Great Libertarian Head Fake: pretend like you care about the practical consequences of some law or regulation when, really, you could give a sh!t because you would want the law repealed on principle even if it worked exactly as intended.

  • ||

    Its not our fault horse are so fucking valuable dead.

  • SIV||

    They're horses. It is fucking more expensive to "inhumanely torture" them than to hit 'em in the head and bleed 'em out.Just adjust the height of the cattle bolt gun up at the fucking abattoir.

  • ||

    Their heads are sloped differently. I wonder if that presents a problem?

  • SIV||

    If it isn't a busy horse day they could use a hammer.

  • ||

    I suppose crucifixion would be considered inhumane too.

  • Michael Corleone||

    I got this one.

  • Bar Student||

    So?

  • sevo||

    "...you could give a sh!t because you would want the law repealed on principle even if it worked exactly as intended."

    Darn if even ignoramuses can't figure it out.

  • Zeb||

    The consequential arguments are just to convince people who are not convinced by the moral arguments.

    But banning horsemeat isn't about humane slaughter. It is about people who are emotionally attached to horses and don't want them eaten because it makes them sad.

  • ||

    I was one of those nine-year-old girls who fell completely in love with horses and read all those Saddle Club books. I think I told my fifth grade teacher I wanted to be a horse whisperer when I grew up.

    And while I hate the idea of eating a pony myself, I'm not a vegetarian and therefore do not have logic on my side. So I won't call for the arrest of the (sick, twisted, horrible) people who want horse kebab.

    But it makes me cringe to hear about how animals are property and should therefore have no legal protections. Is it possible that we need to extend certain natural rights to animals? Seems like we recognize other humans' natural rights because we know they are capable of suffering just as we are, and we don't want them inflicting pain on us either. Do animals maybe have a right to moral consideration commensurate with their ability to suffer?

    Like, things with no central nervous systems don't rate much concern, things that feel physical pain rate more concern, and then we should all agree that critters like nonhuman primates should probably not be tortured to death?

    God knows how you'd classify them. "Excuse me, Mr. Opaki, do you ever ponder your own mortality? No? You sound delicious."

  • Highway||

    No, we recognize other humans natural rights because they are capable of recognizing our own natural rights. When something is not sentient, then it is more about what caretaking the owners accept, and while this is difficult to deal with in cases where people mistreat animals, those are the same corner cases that cause bad laws (like this one) to be made.

    There's certainly the ability and opportunity to convince those who sell and give away animals to choose who they sell to. If someone is known to treat animals in a way you don't approve of, you don't have to sell to them, and I have no problem with you convincing others with facts how they should avoid dealing with those people.

    But as to some supposed test of 'ability to feel pain', I don't see how that would be workable. How would a horse be different from a cow? You obviously think there's a difference, but what about the person who thinks cows are adorable, and horses are just big smelly jerks?

  • ||

    Well, obviously those people are assholes. Everyone knows cows are the big dumb jocks of the farm kingdom. Now pigs.... those guys are clearly superior to those cocky horses. That's where we should focus our outrage!

  • Suzanne Moore||

    I don't think cattle are as dumb as you seem to think. However, they have been bred for hundreds of years - maybe more - to be extremely non-reactive, for the specific reason that it makes them easier to humanely slaughter. I've heard pigs are intelligent, but again non-reactive by breeding. Nothing of the sort has been done with horses. It's not so much intelligence as it is "world view." Horses are prey animals, creatures of flight with all the reaction of their wild ancestors intact. That is the problem. And, they are very different physically from pigs and cattle.

  • ||

    No, I know it's not workable (hence the opaki joke), and I did acknowledge that the distinction I draw between cows and horses is totally irrational.

    I'm just interested in the question of whether/how much nonhuman animals deserve moral regard. I thought maybe it could fit somewhere into a theory of natural rights, but I'm not at all sure how you'd Tetris it in. If you even could.

    Horses are big smelly jerks. Especially that paint pony who refused a jump and sent me over her shoulder. But I loved her, the little bitch.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    It's not about animal rights - it's about human responsibility.

  • ||

    That does sound like a more useful way of thinking about it. But are we talking about a legal responsibility?

    Maybe there's a parallel with child custody. You have control over a dependent being, but you're not allowed to do whatever you want to it. This being might be incapable of higher cognitive functioning (e.g. newborns can't recognize the rights of others), but the law holds its guardian accountable for its welfare.

    I am not modestly proposing that children are equivalent to beef cattle, for the record. For one thing, the cattle are much more politely quiet when I encounter them in the supermarket.

    Of course, this all hinges on what the criteria are for an organism to have natural rights. And that is a big can of incredibly wiggly worms.

  • ||

    Acacia trees communicate danger posed by browsing herds to one another via chemical messaging (acetylene gas). This shows not only awareness of pain, but also an awareness of the place of the individual in the community and a higher responsibility to protect the collective.

    Yeah, have fun drawing those lines.

  • ||

    Damn it, God, haven't You ever heard of Sharpies?

  • JD the Elder||

    If the U.S. requires more-expensive humane slaughter, but the neighboring jurisdictions allow cheaper inhumane slaughter, the horses may still be exported for slaughter.

    Well, of course. But I am starting to think that the "animal rights activists" don't care about the practical consequences either. Or rather, they do care about the practical consequences, just not in the way someone might naively think. If horses suffer more while being transported to Canada or China, then they have all the more reason to press for more laws - either to pressure Canada and China to ban the slaughter of horses, or to ban the export of horses for slaughter. Either way, they win. I call it "the Great Danny Head Fake".

  • Suzanne Moore||

    No method of humanely slaughtering horses is in existence. They would have to reinvente the entire process, and even then, I can't imagine what it would be. Any assembly-line like structure would fail, and it has to be used to kill enough animals to make a profit, so I don't expect any changes at all.

  • Politician||

    There are no, "unintended consequences"

    There are only opportunities to make more laws.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    What you missed was... this is pointless fucking feel-good legislation. Period.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    America is knowingly exporting meat that is not fit for human consumption. You see no real problem with that.

    They're also protecting the property rights of people who REALLY don't like their horses being stolen and slaughtered.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    That was for the anonymous "libertarian head fake" blather above.

  • ||

    Next time try the "reply" button, tardcake.

  • sevo||

    Mr. FIFY|6.27.11 @ 5:50PM|#
    "That was for the anonymous "libertarian head fake" blather above."

    Not anonymous; shithead always signs his bullshit.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Fuck you, Danny. The computer I was on wasn't acknowledging the existence of the "reply" button.

    Fuck off yet again, just for good measure.

  • jtuf||

    Not content to wait for the ban to be lifted at the federal level, New Hampshire legislators have passed a bill—currently awaiting the governor's signature—to permit intra-state slaughter and consumption of horse.

    Go New Hampshire.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Also, Baylen, if you're gonna blog here, you need to get the hang of alt-texting your images.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    "Daddy, I want a pony for my birfday... dinner."

  • jester||

    Cut & Paste?

  • Baylen Linnekin||

    I'd alt-texted with "Look closely. Horse or unicorn?" But I see it's not showing up.

  • Hugh Akston||

    If Reason is using the WordPress platform, the alt-text only shows up if you enter it in the "Title" bar.

    You're not the only contributor hereabouts that has trouble with it.

  • Baylen Linnekin||

    Thanks. Fixed. You're right--I had put it in the "description" bar.

  • ||

    Did I mention I masturbate to photos of livestock.

  • brec||

    Not content to wait for the ban to be lifted at the federal level, New Hampshire legislators have passed a bill—currently awaiting the governor's signature—to permit intra-state slaughter and consumption of horse.

    intra-state?! What a quaint old-fashioned notion!

  • H man||

    It still affects interstate commerce. How long before the Feds nix this one?

  • ||

    You know, we often talk about the unintended consequences of idiot legislation. Foreseeable consequences disregarded would be more accurate in most cases.

  • ||

    There's a Law for that!

    Foreseeable consequences are not unintended.

  • ||

    Foreseeable consequences are not unintended.

    Foreseen consequences are not unintended.

    Just because they can be foreseen does not mean that they are.

    Writing the law like you have breaks about 30 other laws about men being blind and stupid and fools....

    as well as the most important:

    Never ascribe conspiracy when incompetence can explain.

  • ||

    More pro slaughter people that don't care who they poison as long as the make a buck.

    Horse meat is unfit for humans to eat. Food and Chemical Toxicology, Volume 48, Issue 5, May 2010, Pages 1270-1274
    Association of phenylbutazone usage with horses bought for slaughter: A public health risk
    Nicholas Dodman, Nicolas Blondeau, Ann M. Marini http://www.sciencedirect.com/s.....02b682319c
    Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs - prohibited as well Phenylbutazone, known as "bute," is a veterinary drug only label-approved by the Food & Drug Administration for use by veterinarians in dogs and horses. It has been associated with debilitating conditions in humans and it is absolutely not permitted for use in food-producing animals. USDA/FSIS has conducted a special project to for this drug in selected bovine slaughter plants under federal inspection. An earlier pilot project by FSIS found traces less than 3% of the livestock selected for testing, sufficient cause for this special project. There is no tolerance for this drug in food-producing livestock, and they and their by-products are condemned when it is detected. Dairy producers must not use this drug in food-producing livestock and if it is found, those producers will be subject to FDA investigation and possible prosecution. http://www.saanendoah.com/prohibiteddrugs.html
    Page 1

  • sevo||

    Tom Durfee|6.27.11 @ 7:21PM|#
    "More pro slaughter people that don't care who they poison as long as the make a buck."

    More brain-deads spreading horse-poop.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Peta got here quick

  • sevo||

    Just for the hell of it, I checked his links looking for PETA. Neither works.
    So, either PETA whacko or random whacko; who knows?

  • Suzanne Moore||

    If you actually knew anything about PETA, you would know that anyone who loves animals and likes having them around will have absolutely nothing to do with those idiots.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Yep, you're brain dead. It doesn't bother you at all that we really are knowingly sending tainted meat overseas for unsuspecting consumers to eat? I guess not. Must be a lot of sociopaths like you in DC.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Yep, you're brain dead. It doesn't bother you at all that we really are knowingly sending tainted meat overseas for unsuspecting consumers to eat? I guess not. Must be a lot of sociopaths like you in DC.

  • SIV||

    So we export the phenylbutazone-tainted horses to the Belgians...Problem Solved!

  • Bar Student||

    Yeah but if I was allowed to set up a horse farm specifically for use as food this wouldn't be a problem now would it?

  • AlmightyJB||

    I think all government legislation should be followed by a report called "The Unintended Consequences of said government legislation".

  • ||

    Wouldn't that take most of the fun out of it?

  • creech||

    Not a bad idea. Ever read a stock offering? Every possible risk has to be mentioned it seems, up to and including "if an asteroid hits our facility, you may lose your investment."
    If it is good enough for some business wanting to go public, then it's good enough for legislation affecting the entire public.

  • ||

    Page 2

    Horse Owner Survey Shows NSAID Use Trends
    In a recent survey, 96% of respondents said they used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to control the joint pain and inflammation in horses, and 82% administer them without always consulting their veterinarian. More than 1,400 horse owners and trainers were surveyed to better understand attitudes toward NSAIDs, in a project sponsored by Merial, the maker of Equioxx (firocoxib).
    http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=14073
    99 percent of horses that started in California last year raced on bute, according to Daily Racing Form. Bute is banned in the United States and Canada for horses intended for the food chain. That’s a permanent ban.
    Nonsteroidal Medication (NSAID’s)
    Phenylbutazone (Bute), flunixin meglamine (Banamine), and ketoprofen (Ketofen) are the most common NSAID’s used in horses while aspirin and ibuprofen are the most commonly used NSAID’s in humans. These are very effective in eliminating discomfort and are usually the first line of therapy in minor musculoskeletal pain.
    http://www.aaep.org/health_art.....php?id=253

  • ||

    "In a recent survey, 96% of respondents said they used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to control the joint pain and inflammation in horses, and 82% administer them without always consulting their veterinarian."

    4 out of 5 dentists surveyed would recommend sugarless gum to their patients who chew gum.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Would you consider it serious if THEY were sending us toxic food products and not telling the truth?

  • ||

    Page 3
    NSAIDs The systemic NSAID group includes phenylbutazone (Butazolidin) and flunixin meglumine (Banamine), which are 2 of the most widely prescribed drugs in equine medicine.
    Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages 98-102 (March 2005)
    Dr Anthony Blikslager, DVM, PhD, DACVS (Associate Professor)a, Dr Sam Jones, DVM, PhD, DACVIM (Associate Professor)b
    http://www.j-evs.com/article/S0737-0806(05)00061-4/abstract

  • sevo||

    I presume you're dumb enough to think any of this matters?

  • ||

    First I see that most pro slaughter people hide behind screen names. sevo are you so stupid that you can't do any research? If you check the European regulations, you know the place where they raise horses for slaughter you will find that they use the equine passport system which tracks the horse from birth. Then if you can read and comprehend what it means you will find that any horse that has been given bute even once in its life is banned from slaughter. Do some more research and then you will find that all countries that send horses or horse meat to Europe will be forced to have the same requirements. Right now we are in a transition period going to the new regulations but within the next 2 year the US will have to meet the same standards as those of the European Union. What this means is that thanks to horse slaughter it will make owning a horse even more expensive as every horse will have to be micro chipped. Hopefully the American system will be exactly like the European system as it has a box to mark stating that the horse is not for slaughter and once marked can never be changed. Think about it all we will have to do is buy the horse make the box and resell it. Yes there will be those that get around the regulations but criminals will be criminals and you are right to them it doesn't matter. By the way no Peta here just a farmer raising Boer meat goats and Angus beef as well as the owner of 21 horses.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    The US horse owners will NEVER do this. Remember the last time the govt. wanted to institute an ID system? What was it now? NAIS? Something like that, and it was rejected - to put it mildly. Thehorse.com ran a survey recently about horse ID and about 100% said NO WAY. I think what will happen is that the EU will just ban all imports of our horse meat. Belgium already does.

  • ||

    So there's no mention of the possibility that having a standard of the horse ever being given bute ever, might be, you know, a tad unreasonable?

    Methinks the objective here has nothing to do with human health and everything to do with some people thinking there's something immoral about killing horses for food.

    Remember that Asians often eat dog and cat meat. Disgust reactions are culturally specific. What is morally offensive to you, isn't to lots of other people.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    I bet it would matter if YOU were eating it. The EU has grounds for suing the shit out of us, and I kinda wish they would. You might take THAT seriously. BTW, children are especially susceptible to the toxic effects of bute. They die. But, what the hey, right?

  • SIV||

    Oh no, my food took an aspirin before it was slaughtered!

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Aspirin is NOT bute:
    Toxicology Report
    http://www.box.net/shared/lqi4hhkg42

  • Jay Reimenschneider||

    I eat horse all the time.
    I get it from my butcher.

  • ||

    SIV if you can comprehend you would understand that is just letting you know how often bute is prescribed to horses. If you think it is as safe as aspirin please prove it so by taking some yourself, heck if you have a family you can do a group study and all take some bute. I would not recommend it though as this is what bute can do to you.

    Poisoning with equine phenylbutazone in a racetrack worker.
    Ann Emerg Med. 1991 Feb;20(2):204-7.
    Newton TA, Rose SR.
    Source
    Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Florida Health Science Center, Jacksonville 32209.
    Abstract
    Phenylbutazone is a potent nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drug often used by veterinarians to treat racetrack animals. Its use in human beings is limited because of significant adverse effects and the availability of newer, safer drugs. We report the case of a 24-year-old man who ingested 17 g of equine phenylbutazone over a 24-hour period to treat the pain of a toothache. He developed grand mal seizures, coma, hypotension, respiratory and renal failure, and hepatic injury. Serum phenylbutazone concentration obtained approximately eight hours after presentation was 900 micrograms/mL. The patient recovered during six weeks of intensive supportive care and repeated hemodialysis.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1996808

  • JD||

    You'd be risking the same problems if you were stupid enough to take 17 grams of ibuprofen as well. That's an assload of NSAIDs, FDA-approved or not.

  • adam||

    17 *GRAMS* of phenylbutazone....how much horse meat do you think someone would have to eat before getting anywhere near that amount?

    The recommended dose for horses is not to exceed 4 grams per day...so that idiot in your story took 3x the maximum dose recommended for HORSES.

    Furthermore, according to the Canadian regulatory agency, even after feeding horses 3g/day for 3 days, the drug fell below detectable levels within 96 hours of the last dose.

  • ||

    Bar Student you say "Yeah but if I was allowed to set up a horse farm specifically for use as food this wouldn't be a problem now would it?" This is very true but you will have to raise that horse from birth and your pro slaughter side says it takes at least $1800 a year to properly care for a horse so my question for you is this.

    How long are you going to raise these foals at $1800 a year until you sell them? The law is that the foal has to be at least 6 months of age to be send to slaughter. A horse is not full grown until at least 4-5 years so you are going to spend at least $7200 on this farm raised horse that now you are going to sell for slaughter at a price of say $500. I believe there are classes you can take in economics. Or if it actually cost less to care for a horse for a years time please do let me know? I can use that to dispute how much your side says it takes to properly care for a horse.

  • ||

    Tom...thanks for keeping the discussion intelligent.

    However, I believe your efforts are being wasted on idiots that are more interested in verbal one-up-manship and being smartasses.

    This issue and the food quality/safety is lost on these morons. They may not give a shit, but I do and this isn't even about how these animals are treated.

    Looks like the author (and I use the term loosely) took an anti-government press release from NCBA or Farm Bureau and ran with it because it was the government is screwing up slant.

    "You can't fix stupid; ugly, yes. Stupid, never."...Ron White.

  • JD||

    It's not that we don't care about food safety; it's that we don't think it is the government's place to tell consumers what they can or can't eat as long as they are aware of the risks. See any of the discussions about other types of food--it's not just about horse meat.

  • ||

    You really don't understand our food system do you? NRN

    If you don't want the government in your pants about your food...then raise it yourself, but you can't peddle it to someone else.

    If you go to the grocery store than shut up. And this is about unsafe EXPORT food and inhumane, atrocious treatment of an unsanctioned, loopholed meat source that is more about an outlet for excessive and irresponsible breeders and owners of equines...not cars or refrigerators. And last I checked, we do seem to have a problem with folks so desperate for income that they get exposed to all kinds of contaminants, pollute the immediate area all in search of income.

    JD...do some homework on animal-agri business, the US food system, exports/imports and the equine industry in the US...then you can "speak your informed mind".

    Stop with the "laissez-faire" bullshit. Last I checked, it's as eff'd up as communism and our so-called craptialism.

    Gotta have a checks and balance system for assholes, JD.

  • ||

    Pardon moi..."crapitalism"

  • ||

    We also think the grocery store should be allowed to buy what they want and sell what they want, and should expect to pay the price in lost consumers and liability if they sell something that makes someone sick.

    You've never actually been to a libertarian site before have you?

  • ||

    A blind man could figure that this is a libertarian site. Duhh!

    Thanks for the "newsflash"!

    As to the rest, nothing more than hate government at all costs and more laissez-faire bullshit that is neither reality or will be because there are unscrupulous, unethical people with/without businesses around every corner.

  • ||

    How do you think the Kosher food system works? Do you see unethical people marketing pork as Kosher on every corner? Why not?

  • adam||

    "If you don't want the government in your pants about your food...then raise it yourself, but you can't peddle it to someone else."

    WRONG. Please refer to 'Raich v Gonzales' and 'Wickard v Filburn'. You are totally incorrect about the state of Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

  • ||

    Indeed, Wickard v. Filburn says that growing wheat on your own property for personal consumption can violate wheat quotas.

  • ||

    Find one case precedent where a person raising their own crops or livestock FOR PERSONAL CONSUMPTION.

    Wheat quotas? WTF. Last I checked raising an acre or two of wheat doesn't violate quotas. Seems there are a few legal details you both have conveniently left out. Damn those details!

    "can" is a whole hell different from "does".

  • adam||

    Excuse me? Angel Raich was thrown in prison for growing her own medicine.

    Both cases clearly establish the government's authority to regulate any sort of plant or animal production, even if it is not meant for commerce. Wickard established that you would have otherwise purchased the food that you grew instead, and therefore your actions have a tangible effect upon interstate commerce, and therefore can be regulated.

    The Food Safety Act passed last year gives the USDA and FDA the power to seize any plant or animal products any time, anywhere, if they decide that the products are "unsafe".

  • ||

    And there you have it, state allowing v feds saying no. And this case is about medical marijuana, state control v. Fed law...NOT fucking polluted horse meat and living animals being treated worse than garbage. Stroll over to the front page of the lame and liberal LATimes and read about food "problems" in China. You know China? A libertarian's dream and we trade with these crooks.

    Re Wickard....nope....the farmer was doing both in this case, personal and commercial, albeit locally AND was participating in the 1938 Act (controlling the production of many products). Don't need a market card if you are personally consuming, on your own property, your own products. You might have problems with zoning, county codes and neighbors, but that happens everywhere regarding everything from couches on front porches, a steer in the backyard, potbellied pigs, heaps in the yard, etc. Crack, heroin and pot.. an entirely different issue; honestly it should be legal and always respected what Buckley and Paul said about it.

    Seizing an unsafe product is way different than regulating or prohibiting. FDA didn't have recall authority (most food products) prior to and there were problems with their relationship with USDA. And who doesn't have a problem with USDA.

    I don't see states or feds chasing down folks in community gardens and don't remember them attacking the Victory Gardens of yesteryear.

  • adam||

    Read the article again, retard.

    "Not content to wait for the ban to be lifted at the federal level, New Hampshire legislators have passed a bill—currently awaiting the governor's signature—to permit intra-state slaughter and consumption of horse."

    Obvious troll is obvious.

  • ||

    Read the whole thing moron!

    It's full of inaccuracies and flat out, slanted lies.

    And eat all of your own horses as much as you want. There is no law against eating your own horses. And they have passed similar laws in Missouri, etc. So what?

    There is NO ban on horse slaughter in the US you fucking idiot.

    Good luck...you're gonna' need it. And I could careless, until you step on my or my horses toes.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    There's medicine and there's medicine. What was she growing? Was it an illegal substance? If so, gov had the right. Horses on the other hand are legal. It's even legal to slaughter and eat them. As long as the horse is your own property and you don't try to sell the meat for human consumption across state lines.

    How come so many folks can't tell when they're whining about a totally different subject than industrial horse slaughter to export overseas?

  • Suzanne Moore||

    JD ~ That's just the point. The consumers overseas are NOT aware of the risks in eating American horses. They have a tracking system, and they don't realize we don't. I guess they just believe the we wouldn't knowingly send them meat loaded with toxic chemicals. But we ARE. Knowingly.

    We are not talking about "other kinds of food," we are talking about horse meat which we do not eat ourselves but seem to have no problem sending it for foreigners to consume. Totally different situation.

    The government isn't telling you are anyone else they can't slaughter and eat horses. Have at it - you just can't sell the meat for human consumption across state lines.

    See, again it's the problem of not being informed on the SUBJECT AT HAND.

  • JD||

    Since you claim to be a farmer, please explain why it is more expensive to raise a herd of horses for meat than to raise a herd of cattle for the same purpose.

  • ||

    To begin with anyone that has horses and cattle understand that a horse needs more land area than a cow and that they are inherently more expensive to feed (require more food)as their digestive system is not as efficient as a cows or a goats. You must also comply with minimum standards set for a species. Remember we said proper care and for horses, that involves worming with medications that state on the tube Do not give to animals intended for human consumption. Proper care of a horse also involves trimming their hooves every 6 weeks or so. Horses figure out ways to hurt themselves more often than cows do and if you withhold veterinarian care that is called neglect a criminal offense. When a horse is in pain or has swelling the number one prescribed medication is Phenylbutazone. If you get caught sending food animals (cattle, goats,etc) to slaughter with bute in them you can be prosecuted so why should horses be exempt from this regulation? Lets not forget it is your side that has stated how much it takes to care for a horse.

  • ||

    So what you are saying is that a combination of various government regulations makes it impossible for anyone to use horses for food.

    And you're just fine with that because you saw Seabiscuit and decided it was wrong to eat horsemeat.

    So what about the fact that humans have been eating horse meat for thousands of years and it is a common food in some cultures? Those people can go suck it?

    If the net effect of a combination of regulations is to effectively ban a certain type of food, then those regulations ought to be changed.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    I would follow these rules whether they were the law or not, because it's what it takes to care for my horses properly. Same for cats and dogs. They also have wormers, shots, etc. that are banned substances. But we're talking about non-food animals - which are dogs, cats, and horses. Horses are NOT a food item in the US. The cultures they eat horses don't use these substances on horses they intend for slaughter for human consumption. There's plenty of safe horse meat, just not in the US. Get it?

    I don't care what people have been eating or for how long. The US has never been strong on horse eating except in emergency situations like WWII. Even then, when they were feeding it to the soldiers, may gagged on it and others refused it altogether. My cousin was in the latter group. Our culture doesn't eat horses. There are cultures that don't eat sacred cattle either. Do we tell them they MUST eat cattle because we do?

    The regulations that protect our horses are just fine, thank you. If you want to eat safe horse meat, you can always import some.

    And, ya know, that crack about Seabiscuit was not only uncalled for, it was very ignorant. Do you own any animals? Would you object if someone stole them, killed them in a horrible manner and then ate them? The FDA considers horses companion animals and so do a lot of us horse owners.

    Eating horse meat is a cultural thing - some do, but we don't. It's not a matter of right or wrong. It is wrong however to try to force Americans to kill and eat horses if they do not want to.

  • ||

    Ignorance, with a ton of arrogance and dumbass mixed in is apparently, bliss.

    Please keep eating US Horsemeat...just don't claim your healthcare needs on the government dole....suspect private med insurers won't like it either (you know, obesity, smoking, excessive drinking, heroin use, etc). They seem to frown on clients with those "maladies".

  • ||

    Perfect reason why nobody's health care needs should be on the government dole.

    It's far too easy an excuse for idiots like you to use to control people's lives.

    Mandatory morning calisthenics for everyone!

  • ||

    Hey dumbass....I'm agreeing with you.

  • adam||

    no, you're not. you really don't have a clue what this website is all about. do us all a favor and go read some of the archives.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Okay, what IS this website about? Surely not protecting deliberate disinformation such is in this article? If that's it, I don't see the need for reading anything here.

  • ||

    ESPN did a story recently about the miami horse meat black market. Quite horrifying, and it includes stealing the horses for slaughter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf9_ml_QJtU

  • ||

    as I recall, they didn't suggest legalizing the sale of meat as a solution.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    There's is plenty of legal meat in Florida, mel. Didn't you know that? Just not horse meat because it's NOT SAFE. Also, stealing horses for any purpose is frowned upon as well.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Our slaughter plants accepted stolen horses too. Apparently they weren't much of documentation.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Who the heck is the hack who wrote this story? How much did you get paid to leave out the fact that the GAO also recommended prohibiting the transportation to and slaughter of horses completely? This suggestion was just as highly recommended as the one you mentioned. Also, we are sending just as many or more horses to slaughter as we ever have, so how could the "lack of the slaughter option" cause anything at all since the option was never lacking. The economy caused everything else to lose value. Why would one think horses would be any different. The number of horses slaughtered is driven by demand, no by the number of horses available. Slaughter is a predatory, shady, for-profit industry, not a trash dump for irresponsible breeders and owners.

    Oh yeah - didn't some of you know that we have ALWAYS shipped thousands of horses to slaughter in Mexico and Canada? We had 3 plants, 2 in Texas, 1 in Illinois. The US is a big country. There are a great many places in the US that are actually closer to either Mexico or Canada than to Texas or Illinois. And US plants were just as bad as anyone else's. Just think about that.

    More later. Must care for my own horses now. I'm NOT an "animal rights" anything. I am horse welfare advocate. HATE PETA! I've been inside a horse slaughter plant, I've had friends whose horses were stolen for slaughter. If you had seen what I saw in Kaufman, TX, you would NEVER continuance horse slaughter.

    NEXT POST: Why cattle processing works for cattle but not for horses.
    Phenylbutazone is not just ANY NSAID. Neither is horse fly spray, topicals, vaccines, antibiotics, wormers and many others since they are all BANNED substances.

  • ||

    I love how progressives have no fucking clue how incentives work.

  • ||

    And I love it it when fucking libertarians think incentives will solve everybody's problems and create a perfect world order.

  • adam||

    it may not be perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than your dictatorship of the proletariat.

  • ||

    You a communist now? Socialist? That's right, a libertarian.

    Dictatorship? Last I checked, I vote and don't dictate to anything except to my personal possessions...which have certain rules I have to follow with all of them; some moral, some by law/reg.

    No, it's not a helluva better...just a different kind of chaos.

    And your right...I am wasting my time here. You guys just keep stroking one another for validation.

  • adam||

    You're willfully ignorant of the issues you've chosen to troll.

    Do you really think that you've added anything to the conversation, with your gross misrepresentations of the facts and your fearsome violence towards strawmen?

    You're only attracting snark because you're so deeply misguided that nobody on this blog has the time to even begin correcting your mistakes.

  • ||

    No adam, the problem here is that I don't share your opinion.

    The only thing I'm attracting here is stupidity. I'd say correcting mistakes on this pile of shit blog would be a full time job.

    And you got Wickard v Filburn wrong; of which you either wouldn't reply or found the correction too tedious to attempt because you shifted topic.

    Who gives a damn....you seem to.

    "fearsome violence"???? WTH. Off your meds?

    Anybody that doesn't tote the party line gets trashed. Hmmmm...sounds reasonable and civilized to me; that would be your libertarian values at work? And there appears to be a wide spectrum of libertarians.

    Honestly, won't be back and know that you all have to have the sanctimonious last proverbial word.

    Happy Trails!

  • ||

    I vote and don't dictate to anything except to my personal possessions

    Except, of course, whether other people are allowed to eat horsemeat or not.

  • ||

    Never voted on US horsemeat sweetheart.

    But you know that, right?

    And I said, you can kill and eat your own horses all you want. Last I checked, you can even buy on the internet.

  • ||

    Right, so I can only eat horse meat if I slaughter the horse myself. Because everyone is equipped to do their own meat slaughtering in their basement, right?

    This reminds me of "if you don't like it, move!" style arguments.

    How about we ban horse riding entirely. If you don't like it, go move to Mongolia where you can ride horses as much as you like.

  • ||

    Hazel you can eat all the toxic horse meat you want, it is just illegal to market a toxic food product to the public. If you don't like it cry to the FDA,USDA, and to the European Union as their regulations will be required to be followed if you want to export horse meat to them. You can't bypass food safety in the name of making a buck.

  • Suzanne Moore||

    Hazel ~ Other people are free to eat ALL the horse meat they want - even Americans. If you own a horse, it's perfectly legal to butcher and eat it. You can even invite your family and friends and you can all poison yourselves together. The only thing you can't do is SELL the meat for human consumption across state lines.

    As for those overseas, they have plenty of horses of their own, so they don't need to eat contaminated American horses at all. Problem is, they haven't been told American horse meat is contaminated. The word is getting out though. Belgium - which used to be the biggest customer for American horse meat - has banned it from their grocery shelves. The EU is tightening their regulations every year, and Canada vows it will go to the Passport system next year. NO American horse can LEGALLY be sold for human consumption now but affidavits can be forged. The Passport many be harder, but if they try to get around it, the EU will ban American horse meat altogether. May not matter whether S. 1176 passes or not, although I'd prefer that the U.S. cleaned up it's own mess.

  • ||

    BRAVO Suzanne...People really need to educate themselve BEFORE commenting. It would make our lives so much easier ! ! ! The fact is that there is no intelligent reason for bringing slaughter back to the USA...ZERO ! ! ! The people that want to eat their own horses can gag on it even if S 1176 is passed..No one is trying to take that "right?" away from them..

  • vicki||

    Hazel, food safety laws require tracking meds from birth. The US has no such system for horses. Because US horses are not raised as food animals but for other purposes, the horse industry overwhelming shot down an attempt to implement a system (NAIS) before the ink was dry. Many routine meds given to horses for maintenance and illnesses such as wormers, fly sprays, ointments, bute, etc., are prohibited in horses intended for food. One dose and they are ineligible for human consumption slaughter. Those are FDA and EU food safety laws. Bute, as an example, is a carcinogen in humans. A person eating horse meat with bute residues is not going to get sick overnight. Cancer can take years to develop. When there is an outbreak with food animals, they are able to trace the animal back to the farm. That is impossible with horses.

    Slaughter is a foreign meat business, not a disposal service. We have slaughter and supporters are still whining about “unwanted” horses. If it was the cure, there wouldn’t be any. Plants don’t buy the number of available horses but only the amount needed to fill the demand for horse meat. The demand for US horse meat is decreasing. Two major European grocers have pulled US horse meat and will only sell European raised horses. The recent EU report that revealed drug residues in US horses and falsified paperwork accompanying the horses is not going to instill consumer confidence.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement