Food Policy

They Want to Eat Horses, Don't They?

Slaughtering horses is still a good idea. So why do some continue to oppose it?



In the 1935 novel They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (fixed link), by American author Horace McCoy, a dance marathon set in Southern California amid the desperation of the Great Depression drags on for more than a month. It ends with a set of murders—the latter of which gives rise to the titular question.

These days, another tedious dance has dragged on for even longer. And it, too, centers on an end-of-life question about horses. Can we slaughter them for food?

Last month, the state of New Mexico sued to make sure that wouldn't happen in the state. The state's reasoning is simple.

"We don't eat horses in New Mexico," said New Mexico attorney general Gary King, "and we think this is an inappropriate use of this plant."

The plant in question is an Albuquerque slaughterhouse owned by Valley Meat. The plant has passed all required USDA inspections. It's got the green light to open. And now a succession of opponents of eating horsemeat—including King—have sued to keep it shut. Proposed plants in other states—including Missouri and Iowa—are also under threat.

And that's a shame. In addition to the jobs and tax revenue lost thanks to King's suit and the cost of filling and pursuing the case, a New Mexico law could leave state taxpayers on the hook for nearly $450,000 for each month the plant is shuttered.

But that's just the latest inane consequence of attempts to restrict horse slaughter. The history and terrible consequences of America's recently ended federal ban on horse slaughter is something I've detailed here before.

"The ban was always controversial," I wrote over the summer. "And its terrible unintended consequences were both predictable and predicted."

Those consequences included everything from farmers and ranchers having to ship horses abroad for slaughter to those same farmers and ranchers being forced to set horses free—to roam and eventually starve to death.

If laws forced Americans to continue to raise cattle until the cows died of natural causes, we'd be overrun by starving cattle. If laws permitted those same farmers and ranchers to euthanize cattle, then there'd no doubt be complaints about everything from water quality (all those euthanasia drugs seeping into our water!) to disposal. These sorts of proposals aren't solutions. They're invitations to a host of new problems.

As I noted in my column this past summer, most objective sources—including a widely circulated GAO report—state unequivocally that the failure to slaughter horses is a direct cause of suffering for horses. If slaughtering horses reduces their suffering, then why oppose horse slaughter?

"The GAO report's conclusions relied on the false premise that there was a lack of or an end to the slaughter of U.S. horses at some point," says Keith Dane, vice president of equine protection with the Humane Society for the United States (HSUS), in an email to me earlier this week.

Dane is correct that horses were simply shipped for slaughter to Mexico or Canada—often into allegedly brutal conditions. I think that re-opening domestic slaughterhouses would alleviate these problems.

But Dane tells me that "horse slaughter is inherently inhumane and should be abolished."

Meanwhile, Dane's boss, HSUS president Wayne Pacelle, blogged this week that horse slaughter is "The Dumbest Business Idea Since New Coke."

What makes horse slaughter so unpalatable a business model?

"Taking a step back from the legal wrangles in the state and federal courts," writes Pacelle, whose own group has been at the center of those legal wrangles, "I am amazed that the people behind horse slaughter continue to proceed with their thoroughly unpopular gambit, given the impossibly difficult regulatory and social environment they find themselves in."

Pacelle also likens horse slaughter to whale hunting, and concludes there are "too many practical obstacles—legal, political, and social" to make horse slaughter work. It appears to me to be slightly disingenuous for someone who erects legal barriers to and pushes for a total ban on a business practice to also claim that the business practice can't succeed because it simply faces too many legal obstacles and regulations.

(For the record, I agree wtih HSUS's opposition to so-called "ag gag" laws and called the loss of traction of such laws one of my top five food freedom stories of 2013.)

"The issue of whether horses should be slaughtered for food is highly charged, especially given the reality that the country has an overpopulation of horses," wrote the Santa Fe New Mexican in a recent editorial opposing Valley Meat because, the paper claims, its re-opening would give the state a "black eye" nationally. "Killing the iconic animal for meat might be considered cruel, but so is starving to death."

That's true. But it's also true that this long, drawn-out dance, like the one at the center of McCoy's novel, must end. And I hope that end means horses make their way into America's slaughterhouses, which would leave both horses and people better off.

NEXT: Phil Everly, of the Everly Brothers, Dead at 74

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. We don't eat horses in New Mexico...

    No Ikea shops in the state?

    1. Neigh.

      1. Why does New Mexico hate Tuscan cuisine?

  2. There are very good arguments for allowing horse slaughter. Good luck getting yuppie horse people and urbanites in general to listen to them, though.

    I stopped moving in horse show circles years ago, but back when the ban was about to go into affect, daring to predict some of its likely negative consequences was met with "LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU!" by people who should have known better.

    1. affect, effect, whatever. I do grammar good.

      1. My tyuping alsho hazent Ben too goode laytly/

        In my case, I chalk it up to getting old.

    2. There was a whole episode of All in the Family dedicated to this topic. Interesting how the Left has somersaulted on this issue. In the show, it was Meathead and Gloria who advocated eating horse meat (imported from New Jersey) and Archy was the sole diner in opposition.

      1. From New Jersey? I with Archy on that one.

        Hmmm.. This horse meat taste kind of like Jimmy Hoffa.

        1. Hoffa did not evaporate until about two years after that episode aired.

  3. Whats the difference in a cow or a horse?

    1. One runs better. One tips better.

      1. Cows: Twenty Five Percent. Every. Fucking. Time.

        That's how they roll.

        1. Even at family dining? Impressive!

      2. I'll be here all week. Tip the veal and try the waitress.

        1. Tip the veal and try the waitress.

          Only reason to work as a cook. What is it with waitresses and the guys they work with?

          1. Proximity.

      1. Not cows with guns.

        1. No, those insist you eat mor chikin.

  4. Heaven forbid you like a food the State doesn't.

  5. Oh, and your first link's busted. Too many backslashes.

    1. Anybody else unable to get the image to display, either?

  6. After action report on Regulate.

    Take away lesson: hang out with Nate, ditch Warren G.

    1. I keep forgetting things will never be the same again.

  7. Dane's boss, HSUS president Wayne Pacelle, blogged this week that horse slaughter is "The Dumbest Business Idea Since New Coke."

    Coming from a guy who intentionally runs an enterprise as to not make a profit. I'll pass on the advice.

    1. A nonprofit can earn (or heg) lots of money, they just can't use it as profot. But there's nothing to stop this grpup from earnong more money thannthey spend, if they have the skill to do it. I'm not saying they do.

      1. Drinking already this morning?

        1. No, just thick fingers.

          1. You got thicky fingerth fwom Mewitha Hawwith Pewwy?


            I'd rather be drinking ...

      2. Ohh, I didn't know that. I thought that once they met their charitable goals and covered their fiscal responsibilities they threw away, or burned, whatever money was left over. Makes more sense that they could reinvest the remainder. I need to tell my country club that operates as a non-profit, we been doing it all wrong.

        1. They're limited in how they can use extra money - they can't pay dividends to investors for instance. But they could save even more baby seals.

  8. and we think this is an inappropriate use of this plant."

    The owners of the plant and their customers seem to think otherwise.

    1. Heaven forbid we allow anyone actually involved in a transaction to determine how trade is determined or why. If we didn't allow 3rd parties their say, we'd be just like Somalia.

  9. MSNBC genius squad is talking about the "living" minimum wage. Needless to say, they're for it.

    Bonus cred: That "business" magazine, The ECONOMIST, supports it.


    1. If you're not for the living wage then you want people to DIE.

      Mostly black people.


    2. If you're willingly watching MSNBC, I have no sympathy for you.

    3. You know, I should probably get myself on the pundit circuit. I'll propose this new idea - "The Prosperity Wage", I'll call it - and propose that everyone who lives in America should be paid a wage one associates with a prosperous lifestyle.

      Think of it: more people will want to work because, hey, two cars, a fishing boat, and a two-story house even for burger-flippers. And because I went a step beyond a mere living wage, I'll be the darling of cocktail parties everywhere, and my new MSNBC show will be a smash!

      I can't see a thing wrong with this plan.

      1. font_of_stupidity for POTUS!!! Where do I send campaign contributions?

      1. That is the best argument I have seen in favor of raising the minimum wage.

    4. I think the proper response to anyone touting the living wage nonsense should simply be, no, many jobs don't produce enough value to be worth a living wage, and let them sputter.

      It's simple and true. They are playing on people's aversion to telling someone they are less than someone else. They think making the subject uncomfortable, that we must accept their silly premise (that everyone deserves a living wage for their labor regardless of output) as fact. In fact they are counting on it. I say we interrupt their strategy by doing the one thing they are not counting on. Straight up, call it like it is.

      Some jobs do not deserve a living wage. Get over it.

      1. How can you SAY such MEAN things!?!?! I want my job to be? Let's see, writing posts all day, and/or gathering porn on the Inter-Webs, or making really cool ART on the walls, using finger-painting and doggy doo-doo? OF COURSE I should be paid a min wage for doing such things!!!

  10. "We don't eat horses in New Mexico," said New Mexico attorney general Gary King, calling on his ability to speak for over two million people.

    1. From whence Mikhail stole his very successful idea:

      1. In general, it's better to steal ideas from people who know what they're doing. He stole from German weapon designers. Good plan.

        Our current President stole economic ideas from Kalashnikov's bosses.

    2. The AK-47 hasn't been made since the 50's. Those are AKM's. Noobs.

  11. Polls support this. If fifty one percent of the population want to take money from five per cent and give it away, THAT'S DEMOCRACY, so shut up and do it.

    1. What about when 51% decide that abortion is icky and want to ban it?

      1. So violations of the right to life are merely icky?

        What if the voters decide police brutality is icky?

        1. Is my name bo? Do I seem like the bored, loserly sort that wants to talk to you about this?

          Look, for those of us not born with a wire coat hanger wrapped around our heads the abortion debate is fucking boring.

          1. Gee, sorry I brought it up!

            1. And who, exactly, told you I wanted to talk to you as opposed to mocking you, Colonel Buttmunch?

        2. *pulls pin*

          Everyone will get circumcised and eat deep dish pizza?

          *throws grenade*


  12. These people are incapable of entertaining any notion of a model of human endeavor not driven by government compulsion.

    It's horrifying.

    1. Speaking of behavior that needs to be regulated.

      My brother's friend did this when we were kids, but my dad was a little quicker to figure out that warm water would fix the situation, so it never made the paper.

      1. How does one become an adult and never heard of the warm water solution to this problem. My dad taught me that when I was 5.

        Their kid suffered for 15 minutes because they are ignorant. Sad.

  13. I have no sympathy for you.

    I'm doing it FOR YOU, Count Fistulum.

    1. The risk to your brain cells is just too great.

  14. Time is money, as explained by dinosaurs.

  15. my dad was a little quicker to figure out that warm water would fix the situation

    But without consulting an expert, he risked making the situation worse. Somebody should have turned him in to Child Welfare.

    Seriously: The best part of that movie was when they left the kid stuck to the flagpole and came back to class. The teacher asked, "Where's What's-his-name?" and the kid's inner voice says, "WHO?"

  16. Robot snowblower - you know you want one:

    1. Only if I can modify it into a robot zombie-killing machine.

    2. I think it's gonna have problems with more than an inch or two.

      1. That's what she said.

  17. The heck is that mayor of NYC going to do with the horses he plans to ban from pulling carriages?

  18. The comments to the facebook post of this article are hilarious. Filled with gems like "they're so majestic", "would you eat a dog", "we can connect with them on a higher level"

    1. Not really, yes, no.

    2. "we can connect with them on a higher level"
      Only if you're short.

    3. And by eating them, we can absorb some of their majesty!

    4. "we can connect with them on a higher level"

      I've heard tell of lonely farmers doing such things.

  19. Melissa Harris Racetroller is apologizing for her smarmy juvenile Behavior last week.

    A TEARFUL apology.

    Fuck you, you childish pathetic bitch.

    1. People laugh when they're gettin' away with it, and then cry when they get caught.

      If I were Romney, I'd go on teevee and say, "Yes, we gots ourselves a black baby, and we love the shit out that little black baby. And as long as he grows up to be anything other than a lisping, half-retard socialist we'll keep loving him."

      mic drop

      1. Electoral losers with fuck you money (like Romney!) really ought to be saying "fuck you" a lot more.

    2. If you parthe her apowagy, it wath actually to bwakth, not Romney.
      Mendacious bitch.

  20. Also, if you are a "public figure", you don't get to have privacy. So, suck it up, Mitch, and tell your little pickaninny we just want what's best for him.

  21. Now we're back on the SOCIAL JUSTICE track. Di Blaswio will tear down the edifices of privilege, and make us all equal. Whew.

    Also, TEA PARTY SUX.

    1. No more pwivwege? Hooway!


    1. "Be vewwy qwiet. I'm hunting Wepubwicans. huhuhuhhuhuhuhuh."

  23. I imagine that a raw milk based rue would go great with many cuts of horse.

    1. I saw a teevee cook-type person make horse filets in a fancy sort of way.

      The meat was beautiful looking, and seemed really tender.

      It may have been on Bourdain.

        1. Not what I saw, but:

          Some lady on u-tube cooking a horse steak.

          Try and tell me that meat doesn't look delicious.

  24. "The system is rigged," says wealthy magazine publisher Katrina van den Hoven. "Elizabeth Warren told me."

    1. There are very few people in this world that I would like more to hit in the face with a shovel than that smug cunt van den Hoven

    2. The system is rigged. The problem with people like van den Hoven is that Elizabeth Warren (and people like her) are doing the rigging.

  25. "Left wing populist racism?" No such thing.

  26. Anyone here own a Colt 6920?

    I'm about 90% decided on getting one and want to know if you dope fiends have any experience with it.

    1. I have no experience with that particular rifle.

      I have only been shooting .223 for a year or so. I have extensive experience with a great many other calibers and I am starting to lean towards '223 is not enough fire power'.

      Also, I dont like ARs because they dont have a piston. Gases blow on the bolt face, gum the works up and make it hotter than shit after only a few rounds.

      Mini-30. You cant miss, so to speak.

      1. Technically, the gas doesn't blow on the bolt face, it is directed between the bolt and bolt carrier, where it drives the carrier backward. Yes, it can get gummed up, but I have an M16 that has shot well over 1,000 rounds between cleanings and haven't had a dirt-related stoppage yet.

      2. I have extensive experience with a great many other calibers and I am starting to lean towards '223 is not enough fire power'.

        Mini-30. You cant miss, so to speak.

        Oh dear God...

        GBN, the 6920 is a great rifle.

    2. HK 91A3.

      The Porsche 930 of assault Rifles.

      1. HK 91A3.

        The Porsche 930 of assault Rifles.

        Not an assault rifle.

        7.62mm NATO is also verging on damn near $1/round for the cheapest FMJ. 5.56mm (actual 5.56mm, not .223) can be had for a third what 7.62mm/.308 goes for.

        A real pre-'89 HK91 will fetch some big money. The Portuguese and Greek weapons imported by Springfield Armory are getting to be multi-thousands too. PTR91 Inc. is pretty much the only game in town for newly-manufactured 91s and their reputation is, um, not great.

        HKs also fucking destroy brass, not great if you want to reload.

    3. Why a Colt? I don't know what they cost now, but you can build a great AR for cheap. Again, don't know what they cost now, but with Colt, you're basically paying a hefty premium for the name. The parts are no better, necessarily, than what you can buy from anyone else.

      1. Perhaps I've been lucky but every Colt I've sold, sold for more than I bought it for. You're absolutely correct about being able to lego a AR cheaply and that hefty premium, but Colts do hold their value well at least.

    4. I own one--my AWB sunset present to myself. Great rifle, is technically a LE6920 as it has all the silly FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT/MILITARY USE ONLY stampings. I'm afraid I have no idea on Colt's recent QC, though.

      Ugh. That just made me remember ammo prices from a decade ago.

  27. Ralph Nader is still alive?

    "Minimum wage is less than in 1968!"

    No mention of Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke.

    1. How many hours would one have to work, at minimum wage, in 1968 to purchase 1GB of digital memory?

      1. You would have to work about that many hours just to arrive at the point in time where it was invented - which is the point, I'm sure.

        I was watching a version of A Christmas Carol last week and one of the major messages I got from it is that our poor have luxury that Scrooge couldn't have dreamed of even with the aid of his worst bit of bad cheese.

        1. That is very true, but some parts of Scrooge's lifestyle were the result of the fact that he was a miser.

          Remember, Scrooge wasn't just stingy with others, he was brutally stingy with himself.

          He could easily have afforded to heat his home and office to a comfortable temperature (for example) and simply chose not to.

          1. That's absolutely right but I took that into account with my thoughts. Scrooge had personal problems related to his wealth but the message of the gap between him and the poor doesn't seem very relevant today, at least here in the first world.

        2. But the nannies at the EU wouldn't let Scrooge have any Casu Marzu ...

    2. The minimum wage in 1968 was $1.60. I actually thought it was $1.80 but I checked.

      According to this inflation calculator "What cost $1.60 in 1968 would cost $10.42 in 2012."

      So, technically the statement is correct.

      1. That doesn't sound right. My first "real" job was in Feb 1968 and the minimum wage was $1.15. A while back I found an old pay stub from a job after that and the rate was $1.45. I would have loved to have gotten $1.60 at that time.

        ... Hobbit

        1. You're both correct. The federal minimum wage varied, depending on the business.

          Footnote 1-3 at the bottom of

      2. The beautiful thing at the time was, you could not buy an anti-lock braking system at any price back then, and the government did not force you to buy one either.

  28. Heck allow dog eating, too. PETA and HSUS and their ilk are putting down millions of dogs a year. All those carcasses got to the landfill. Meanwhile, we've got millions of Asian and African immigrants that think dogmeat is nummy. Sell them the dead dogs, and use the money to run shelters so you don't have to kill as many dogs! People are so stupidily sentimental about animals. In New York, thanks to "Buster's Law", you can do more time for kicking a dog than for sexual assault. Seriously. Where are the feminists on that one?

    1. "Can you stop at the Humane Society Deli only our way home and pick up 10 lbs of terrier for the party this weekend?"

      1. Will they sell artisanal mayo at this deli?

  29. How many hours would one have to work, at minimum wage, in 1968 to purchase 1GB of digital memory?

    This is a trick question, isn't it?

    1. Actually, I wonder if there was even a GB of digital storage in the entire world in '68.

  30. So...

    Ted Nugent got his icky face all up in Toby Keith's stank taint defending his anti-gun attitude.

    Seriously, read this editorial. It's so fucking desperate and sycophantic that I almost puked in my pants.

    Also, I really don't like ted nugent.

    1. The liability angle isn't totally wrong, but when I read this:

      "I spent my 60th birthday with Toby blasting numerous weapons of varying calibers including the ultimate rock-and-roll fun gun, the mighty .50 caliber "Ma Deuce" machine gun. The Texas Hill Country is littered with acres and acres of Uncle Ted part-time spent brass,"

      I said bullshit. Every Mythbusters episode involving a firearm shows them gleefully shooting them on the range, up to and including a minigun. Yet it's clear that they hold the typical San Francisco attitude with respect to the RKBA.

  31. OT: So the president wants to extend unemployment benefits again. IIRC, they get up to 99 weeks between federal and state programs.

    Seems like after almost two years unemployed, no one is going to want to hire these people. IIRC, they usually have to apply for jobs and such. So, 50-100 applications, and no one bit. Isn't that a good sign not to hire that person? Seems at that point, they just end up on disability.

  32. Seems at that point, they just end up on disability.


    A new class of permanent welfare clients. This is how Progressivism works.

    And now they are busily lying about the Little Sisters of the Poor.

    OH, NOOOOOO! Hobby Lobby is not a person, it's a evul kkkorporation.

  33. Citizens United has destroyed American democracy!

  34. Fucking freedom of association- how does it work?

  35. Subject change:

    Honestly, I think it's crazy that the NFL is going to allow the Green Bay game to be played.

    They should move it to the closest domed stadium.

    I like games played in bad conditions, but I think "finger-losing and nose-losing frostbite" is a bit too out there for my taste.

    1. That's one of the reasons why I root for Green Bay; they play football under the conditions that football should be played under. Outdoors in the Midwest winter? FUCK YEAH! Pussy teams play under domes and the pussiest play in domes with holes in the roof.

      Yeah, I went there.

      ... Hobbit

    2. What are you Fluffy, some kinda communist faggot?

    3. The NFL gets to tell the Packers they can't play in their own stadium? Go fuck yourself.

      1. And thus continues the increased pussification of the NFL, in lockstep with the pussification of society in general. Football as it was when it became great, is effectively gone. As the late, great Artie Donovan said about the new face guards on helmets, "You can't even get your fingers in there!"

  36. So my bastard child's grandparents read the Atlantic, and there was a pretty interesting article about Dogfish Head's Ancient Ales. Basically a scientist analyzed the molecules stuck to ancient pottery fragments and they tried to recreate the drinks.

    The conclusion was that prior to German purity laws, alcoholic beverages contained other ingredients like fruit and honey and there wasn't a clear difference between beer, wine and mead. I'm wondering though, what if they just didn't wash the cup and there was residue of everything that was ever poured in it?

    Anyone tried one? I think they're made in pretty limited amounts.

    1. Wow I never thought of that, but it actually makes sense.

      I've been reading about some medieval and ancient brewing techniques, and I think I'm going to try some the next time I brew. Right now I'm thinking about making Finnish Sahti, I've never tried it before, and I curious how it tastes.

      I've also heard of ancients brewing with leftover bread, instead of grain, and I plan one trying that too someday. Should be interesting.

      1. Leftover bread seems like it has the potential to come out as Pruno.

      2. There's probably a lot to the idea. I stumbled into meadmaking last summer and I've been making a half gallon every month by adding yeast to raw honey. Every batch has been not just drinkable but exquisite right out of the fermenter. My yeasts have been both wild (from the air in my home and from the honey itself) and cultivated (depending on how I felt that month), but the truly common thread has been using honey that has never been cooked. Reading the major mead forums and sites now tells me that I'm doing it wrong and mead needs to age for at least a year before it becomes acceptable.

        My way produces various show faults - it's not clear when I drink it, for instance - but I have to think that if it's that good right away I'm on the right track here.

        1. Usually with mead, the problem you run into is it gets too dry (make you cough dry, I mean). If you're just doing honey and yeast with little or no water, I'd imagine the yeast dies off while it's still sweet.

          I haven't made a mead in a while, usually go with heating it a bit, though. And it does get a lot better after 6 months or a year.

          Adding some fruit juice (frozen grape or apple concentrate are fine) gets mead fermenting a lot faster, without much change in flavor.

          1. Oh, I didn't mean literally honey and yeast - it wouldn't even start then. I've been taking a pint of honey and adding water up to about a half gallon total volume.

            The problem with doing such small batches is that you hate the idea of wasting any by taking gravities, so I don't know for sure how complete the ferments were. But I had some batches that were dry tasting but delicious and others that you could tell by flavor might not be quite done (but still tasty).

            This year I'm looking to increase to a gallon of wild and raw mead / melomel / methglin each month and age half of each batch. We'll see how it goes.

            1. Ah, gotcha. Cool.

              Depending on how long you age them, if you have ones that are still sweet, it may be worth stopping the yeast with camden tablets, to make sure they don't start throwing corks or blowing up bottles.

              Some of the best meads I've had were stopped a bit early. Fun stuff to make.

              Which reminds me, I've got a pumpkin ale from before Halloween that I really should bottle today.

              1. Thanks for the tips. I've been having a lot of fun with it, and I have found the meads to be a lot more enjoyable than most of the country wines I tried (with the exception of a blackberry from this summer, which was also excellent at bottling).

            2. Get a refractometer. Only takes an eyedropper amount to measure gravity (although you have to use a spreadsheet for the calculation, once fermentation starts, because alcohol bends light funny).

              1. I'll look into that.

    2. The conclusion was that prior to German purity laws, alcoholic beverages contained other ingredients like fruit and honey and there wasn't a clear difference between beer, wine and mead.

      Wine would be clearly different. Beer and Mead though, yeah, lots of overlap.

      And it wasnt the German purity laws that changed things, it was the discovery of hops.

      The Reinheitsgebot only applied to Bavaria (until unification), so really had no effect on Bohemia or Belgium or England or even northern Germany.

  37. I think it's crazy that the NFL is going to allow the Green Bay game to be played.

    It'll give people something to bitch about.

    ps- Fuck the NFL.

  38. BBC columnist makes fun of David Brooks pot arguments, cites Matt Welch's comments on the difference between acceptance and endorsement.

    The comments are pretty derpy though, but if even a Brit can understand the difference, there's no excuse for David Brooks.

    1. there's no excuse for David Brooks

      Coulda just went with this.

  39. David Brooks ate horsemeat - but you shouldn't.
    David Brooks got wasted in Vegas - but you shouldn't.
    David Brooks skied down Corbet's Couloir - but you shouldn't.

    1. I made it to Casper Woods in a blizzard once.

  40. So what do you do with the carcass of a horse who is put down for merciful reasons?

    Meat from an older horse would likely be too tough and stringy for people, but could serve for pet food. Fat chance of pet lovers buying it, though.

    Probably the only way to get palatable meat from horses is to raise them as butcher animals from birth. The PETA crowd as well as the horsey set would go nuts over this.

    1. So what do you do with the carcass of a horse who is put down for merciful reasons?

      Rendering plant or back hoe.

  41. So what do you do with the carcass of a horse who is put down for merciful reasons?

    Around here, the bears take care of it. And wolves, coyotes, foxes, magpies, eagles, ravens.......

  42. Here's a solution. Don't DO anything. Let people solve their own problems.

    1. Here is the late billionaire J.R. Simplot's solution."It was 1923-the land empty and wide open-and he had seen wild horses out on the Owyhee Desert, "runnin' by the hundreds. I'd go out and knock a couple over with a rifle and jerk the hides off 'em with my pickup." He got arrested for shooting a few with brands on, "but I settled with the guy and we got along." He got two bucks for the hide and then he'd haul the carcass into town and feed them to his pigs.
      The cooker held about three tons of potatoes and he fed spuds and horse meat to the pigs. His fuel was sagebrush and a little coal. At one time he had about 600 hogs. "In the spring when we had a hot market, I sold those damn hogs for seven cents a pound!" That was unheard of in those days and he got a check for $7,000. "That made me," he says with a satisfied grin. "That made me."

  43. we eat the animals we are acculturated to eat.
    It doesn't mean than we can't or shouldn't eat other animals- just that it is not in our culture to eat cats, dogs, horses ect.... Other civilizations do.
    In difficult times man has and will eat just about anything.
    I don't have a problem eating animals - as long as they are killed humanly(as painlessly as possible). That is one of the differences between man and other animals.

  44. Surely the opposition to horse slaughter can find a better animal organization to partner with than the fraud-plagued Humane Society of the United States.

    HSUS has more criminal associations than the Clintons, going back decades. They include Paul G Irwin, David Wills, Howard Cloth, Scotlund Haisley, Arthur Benjamin, John "J.P." Goodwin, the Schulhof family (and the other crooks that run HSUS's mail mill Quadriga Art). HSUS is facing a $20 million RICO lawsuit that they have little chance of winning. HSUS is also contending with an active $5 million suit for an illegal raid and seizure of animals. HSUS's Director of Food Policy, Matt Prescott, created the "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign while at PETA. Look it up.

    The CEO of HSUS, smooth talking, slick, perfectly coiffed Wayne Pacelle, is a pathological liar and greedy huckster who is loathed by the legitimate animal welfare community and animal lovers from coast to coast. Does Attorney General King really believes this guy's schtick? Remember, while Pacelle claims that HSUS has 11 million members, the real number is less than 10% of that fake figure. Just check page 2 of their tax returns, filed on penalty of perjury.
    In other words, getting into bed with Pacelle won't get you votes, just fleas.
    And it may very well result in a loss in the fight against the resumption of horse slaughter in America.

    1. Yes, I agree on all counts. The fact that King even mentions HSUS or Pacelle makes you think little to no research has gone into this.

  45. up to I saw the check of $8495, I did not believe best friend actualy earning money part time from their computer.. there friend brother started doing this 4 only fourteen months and as of now cleared the dept on there appartment and got a top of the range Ariel Atom. website here

  46. I wonder if the horsemeat would even be OK for human consumption, just because I know horses tend to get wormed and vaccinated frequently, and I remember on the tubes of dewormer there was always a warning about not using it on animals intended for food. I would think it would be older, sickly animals going to slaughter, and that most of them were probably treated with meds including antibiotics just before the owners sent them to the knacker's yard. If those horses can't be used for human consumption (at least not here in the U.S.), I wonder if it's even worth it to the slaughterhouses to take them on a regular basis. I guess there's always the pet food industry - they take anything and everything.

  47. Horse slaughter is NOT humane euthanasia!

    With the captive-bolt, which was developed for use on cattle, stunning is ineffective over 40% of the time when applied to domestic, trained horses (the ones full of prohibited drugs and medications.) This is due to the fact that horses' heads cannot be restrained as cattle are and accuracy is very difficult. Horses will routinely break their own necks if restrained. The captive-bolt is ineffective at stunning wild, untrained or under-trained horses nearly 100% of the time. Everyone who knows horses and has any experience at all with wild horses knows that it is near impossible to get anywhere near their poll which is a very vulnerable area to every horse. To get near a wild horse's poll with a captive-bolt apparatus and have an accurate shot is technically, practically and virtually impossible. This is the reason why we find so much carcass evidence documentation of severe abuse to slaughtered horses. The captive-bolt process itself is so ineffective that many horses are shot multiple times or vivisected while conscious. This is a definite violation of the Humane Slaughter Act which mandates slaughtered animals to be rendered "senseless with one (1) shot."

    Please visit this website for more information and important action items YOU CAN DO TODAY to help U.S. horses avoid horrible abuse in the future:

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.