NO HORSIN' AROUND
An aging horse used to be sold to a slaughter house, regulated by the USDA.
Owners would receive a sum of money to put toward the care of younger, healthier livestock. Not anymore. Despite this and the violation of property rights, John Ensign wants to end the horse slaughtering business.
BY LEWIS WHITTEN

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) is all for the free market — unless your business is “un-American.” A $42-million industry has been put out-of-business due to legislation passed Sept. 20.

The amendment, introduced by Ensign and Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), bars the use of federal funds to facilitate the slaughter of horses. So now USDA inspectors will not inspect the horse-meat at three slaughterhouses — two in Texas and one in Illinois.

Transporting live horses to our neighbors in Mexico and Canada for slaughter is also illegal now, due to this legislation. Eventually the horse-meat would make its way to countries overseas where horse-meat is accepted as a legitimate food source or be shipped domestically to feed hungry lions and tigers.

Siegfried & Roy’s white tigers are horse-meat consumers who will now have to either abstain from eating horse-meat or get their equine fix on the black market.

These three slaughterhouses have been the target of Humane Society extremists for years. From listening to their arguments you’d think they were burning flags in those slaughterhouses.

“The market for horse-meat is not an American market,” Byrd said. “Many Americans would be shocked to learn that our animals suffer such a fate, all in order to satisfy the tastes of those living in Europe and Asia.”

Ensign concurred. “The time has come to put an end to the practice of slaughtering horses in America. Horses have an important role in the history of our country, particularly the West, and they deserve our protection. As a senator and a veterinarian, I am committed to doing what I can for these magnificent animals.”

The American Veterinary Medical Association, a 142-year-old organization representing 72,000 veterinarians, does not agree with Ensign. Dr. Mark Lutschaunig, a spokesperson for AVMA, is adamantly opposed to the legislation. 

“The American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Association of Equine Practitioners recognize that the processing of unwanted horses is currently a necessary aspect of the equine industry, and provides a humane alternative to allowing the horse to continue a life of discomfort and pain, and possibly inadequate care or abandonment,” Lutschaunig said.

The thousands of horses slaughtered for human consumption each year are often sent to a processing facility because they are no longer serviceable, are in poor health, dangerous, or their owners are no longer able to care for them. This law has essentially violated the property rights of those horse owners.

Previously an owner could sell an aging horse to a slaughter house, regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture, and receive a sum of money to put toward the care of younger, healthier livestock. That option is no longer available.

This legislation has created financial hardship for farmers who must now care for unwanted horses. The American Association of Equine Practitioners estimates that caring for an aging horse would cost approximately $1,825 per year.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) was one of 29 senators to vote against the bill.

“This is a property rights issue,” Cornyn said. “Is government going to declare that personal property is valueless without just compensation? Apparently so.”

Other industries were hit by this legislation as well. For instance, components of a slaughtered horse are used to produce paint brushes and violin bows. 

Because the legislation was inserted into a budget bill, the ban will only last one year. Other bills are currently sitting in the house and senate that would place a permanent ban on horse slaughter. Human Society activists are trying to build momentum off this bill to gain support for the permanent ban. LW