Posted on 02/24/2005 1:05:27 PM PST by Willie Green
For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.
RENO, Nev. - For the first time in more than a generation, the mustang - the very symbol of the American West - can be slaughtered for horsemeat.
In December, Congress repealed the 34-year-old ban on the slaughter of the wild horses that run free across the West. The move has brought a powerful backlash from activists, who want to reinstate full protection for the mustangs.
"It is really a slap in the face to the American people," said Betty Kelly, co-founder of the horse protection group Wild Horse Spirit in Virginia City, Nev.
Acting on behalf of ranchers who say the horses eat forage needed by cattle, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., attached the amendment in December to a spending bill that President Bush signed into law.
It allows for the sale for slaughter of some older and unwanted horses that are captured during the periodic government roundups aimed at reducing the wild population, now estimated at 33,000 across 10 Western states. About 19,000 of the horses are in Nevada.
A bill to reinstate the slaughter ban was introduced in Congress last month.
Responsibilty for rounding up horses on federal land and selling them rests with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which has yet to send any of the animals to slaughter.
BLM officials said the agency is reaching out to animal protection groups and is optimistic that before the summer, it will find new homes for the 8,900 horses and burros that could be subject to slaughter.
"We realize it is a challenge, but we think there are owners out there that would provide the kind of care we are looking for," BLM spokesman Tom Gorey said from Washington, D.C.
The issue has dogged the Interior Department and Congress since Nevada's Velma Johnson, also known as Wild Horse Annie, and a legion of schoolchildren persuaded Congress to outlaw the use of motor vehicles to hunt the mustangs in 1959. That was followed by the Wild Horse and Burro Protection Act of 1971.
Sylvia Fascio, a fifth-generation Nevada horse breeder, said there are too many wild horses roaming the BLM land next to her ranch, and some should be sold for slaughter.
"I enjoy the wild horses. I'm blessed to live out here among them and it's a very romantic thought. But there is such a thing as reality," Fascio said. "Since they can't seem to find homes for all of these horses all of the time, there is only one thing left. There are foreign countries that eat horsemeat. We don't now, but we did during World War II. I see nothing wrong with that."
The fate of the horses is also a question of cultural values, according to Mike Schroeder, a Washington state wildlife biologist. "I think of them more as livestock. But a lot of tribes I work with think of them as wildlife that should not be touched," he said in a speech to a Western Governors Association conference earlier this month.
It is a volatile issue. Scott Freeman, a defense attorney in Reno, defended one of three young men who were accused - and eventually acquitted of most charges - in the 1998 shooting deaths of 33 horses on the edge of Reno. The shootings outraged animal protection groups around the world and led to death threats against Freeman.
"I have lots of experience doing homicide cases, but I have never experienced the emotional outburst I did with the horse case," he said. "The rallying cry was for the defenseless animals and that the individuals - who in my case turned out to be innocent - should basically be strung up."
Burns said the repeal of the slaughter ban is necessary to manage the herds and protect the range. The measure allows the sale of horses more than 10 years old, as well as any that go unadopted three offerings in a row.
The BLM said it believes the 37,000 free-roaming wild horses and burros on the range are about 9,000 more than natural food supplies can sustain. Its aim is to bring the population down to about 28,000.
BLM Director Kathleen Clarke said the agency already is getting some responses in its effort to find homes for the animals and hopes to find a solution "in a way we feel good about."
ON THE NET: http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov
You are free to not eat anything you don't want to eat. Just don't impose your preferences on others by law.
There is something in me that detests people who zealously want to control the lives of others. I don't like the smell or taste of cigarettes, but everytime I see one of the anti-smoking zealots, I wish I was a smoker just to piss them off.
It's to make room for cattle to graze already fairly sparse pasture in public lands on lease. It isn't because the land can't support them, it's because a decision has been made about value.
I support the affordable beef that large cattle operations provide... I don't fail to see their value too, but there has to be a balance found that is better than this.
I stop short of thinking it would ever be a good idea to turn horses into a game animal to be hunted, but the answers provided in this article, either life being fed in holding pens or sale to factory slaughter, they can't be the best idea out there. We need some new ideas.
Yeah, the reason we're free is because we don't eat horses. Okay, whatever works for you I guess...
These are societal preferences, not mine alone. That's why they work. That's why we don't have people with pet dogs walking past skinned dogs for sale in this country, people with pet dogs living next door to dogs being beaten to death for their meat, as they do in Asia. There are some things societies make rules about, and one of the things we've decided we don't want to see is our dogs, cats, and most say horses, being eaten. If you like the ideas of those countries, you'll fit in there easier than you will fit in trying to convince us to eat Rover. Or our horses. There's no market for horse or dog meat here, and never will be.
What a foolish comment. The horses will FEED the children.
I don't want to convince you to eat anything. You can have pet chickens and pet hogs too for all I care.
Personal preferences is not a good basis for making laws. You are free to eat and not eat whatever you choose, respect others and afford them the same.
Are you willing to pay for all of the euthanasia of all horses that don't have owners who feel the same way about their animals?
Euthanasia costs less than a set of my horse's shoes. There are responsibilities that come with horse ownership, and slaughter or starvation are not your only choices. We don't send our old dogs to slaughter either. I'd argue that it is long past that horses were the valued but not really loved work animals we needed to survive, they are now a luxury, a pet, a hobby. Some hobbies have expenses.
I'm not in any position to impose my will on the world, but I can try to change the minds of those horsemen I talk to.
I've also raised and fed steers for slaughter, it's not really the same thing now is it? Steers being grained get so pushy I feel I could shoot them myself ;~D
I'm somewhat disappointed that you disparage cattlemen. Do you really want everyone to live in cities and maintain the wild west for wild horses and predators to have their free range? Is raising beef on corn-fed lots in the midwest really superior to the cowboys of the West?
My ancestors settled the west to raise Clysdales and beef. They did not have vast landholdings, the range was held in common and everyone in the community ranged their cattle on it. There was never a problem with overgrazing - they didn't want to denude the range of vegetation...it would have killed their livlihood and and starved them into oblivion.
The problem started when the Federal Government in Washington DC thought they were better land stewards and took possession of millions and millions of acres in the west. The story was, the Feds would manage it "better." So these trusting people turned over their rights to the BLM. This was in the days when we still trusted the Government...I think we've come to understand that control is best left to the State. It is my feeling that the land the Feds took control of needs to be returned to the people that live there. Where in the Constitution does it give the Federal Government the right to control lands.
I agree, and though it's gotten mingled on this thread, we do need to seperate the wild horse herd management problem from the slaughter of pet horses, I realize that. We do need a different solution than 10,000 horses in a pen with nowhere to go. They let the problem get too big.
I did not. Read it again. In fact I made a seperate paragraph that clarified that I did not disparage cattlemen. I just outlined the facts. The horses are a problem because they compete with cattle, not because the land couldn't support them. Some were making the assumption that it was a limited native habitat problem, and that would be wrong.
I think that's a bit simplistic... The problem is sheer numbers of people and cattle then versus now as well.
I think that's a bit simplistic... The problem is sheer numbers of people and cattle then versus now as well.
We're talking about Northen Nevada and Western Utah, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming...there is no "population explosion" in the region as far as I know. This is a fallacy of people that live in populated areas (mostly blue States). I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come across as rude. I think you are a great horsewoman and a insightful conservative. I just get very emotional (...oh yeah, lets leave emotion out of this) when there is talk about my homeland.
There may not be an explosion of people in those areas, but there certainly is a relative increase from the days of your forefathers, in the numbers of cattle being grazed to supply the demand of the rest of the country. I don't disparage them. We just need to be accurate about what the situation is.
Actually the number of cattle on the range has decreased. The highest numbeer were reported prior to the 1970's.
OK - I'll stipulate to that if you say so. I'm trying to talk ideas and trends here, not get mucked up by numbers ;~D
Where can you get hundreds of dollar a pound?
Becky
"It's to make room for cattle to graze already fairly sparse pasture in public lands on lease. It isn't because the land can't support them, it's because a decision has been made about value."
Thanks for the info. Your horses are beautiful and obviously well loved! I'm always grateful I grew out of my "horse lust." I know if it had kept up, I'd be totally broke today. Raising laying hens is much cheaper all the way around, though they don't care to be saddled up much, LOL!
I still want my own milk cow, though. Preferably a Brown Swiss, if I can afford one. ;)
Heh - I think he/she got horses confused with truffles ;~D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.