[nathanbedford]

What exactly is the core objection to the proposed slaughter of 40,000 feral horses?

Is it that the slaughter itself is inhumane? Is it that the slaughter will somehow disseminate antibiotics into the world food supply? Both? If the fear is that horsemeat will be consumed by humans or animals containing antibiotics and hormones, how does that occur? Does it occur through human waste and animal waste entering the water supply? Or does it occur simply because the "toxic" meat is ingested?

How is it these animals have so many drugs in them in the first place? If the animals are captive enough to inject, are they not subject to castration? Or slaughter without administering drugs?

I don't understand what the complaint fundamentally is. Is it not clear that the land cannot tolerate 40,000 animals grazing? Is the problem that this is a land grab by the Obama administration? Is it that there are competing views of the wilderness, that is, while the horses versus wolves or Buffalo?

[Axenolith]

Destroying North American wild horses and burros seems to be a holy grail for Ecoturds/Globalists because it cuts deep into the heart of the independence and mythos of the western United States. There are more horses in the US now than there ever was prior to vehicles in the US and killing off a few tens of thousands subsisting on marginal lands that had legislation specifically enacted to protect them and the frontier heritage they represent is bullshit.

Given that, I wouldn’t put it past a group to utilize their plight in their efforts to eliminate the processing of unwanted or injured domesticated horses for human consumption which, as distasteful as I personally find it, I wouldn’t ban.