In a disappointing vote, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a Farm Bureau-opposed bill, HR 503, the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. This legislation would set a negative precedent by banning a livestock product for reasons other than food safety or public health. There has been no action on the Senate companion bill, S. 1915. Only Representatives Boehlert, Higgins, and McHugh voted “no” on this onerous bill. The remaining members of New York’s congressional delegation instead listened to emotional rhetoric from animal rights groups and supported passage of this legislation. Although animal rights activists claim that the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act is an animal welfare bill, its passage would actually be seriously detrimental to the humane care and treatment of horses. The unintended consequence of eliminating this humane euthanasia option for horses would result in leaving as many as 100,000 horses each year to neglect and abandonment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Indeed, it has other severely shortsighted features as well.
For one thing, it comes very close to telling people what they can and cannot do, or even can or cannot eat, based on emotional reasons alone. Human consumption of horse meat is almost unknown in the US, but it is not in Europe. Most horses slaughtered in North America are destined for Europe, so in essence this tells the Europeans we disapprove of what they eat. Pretty insulting. Americans hate it when other countries tell us what we should, or should not like, and it isn't wise for us to do the same.
Moreover, the overwhelming majority of horses slaughtered in North America are slaughtered in Canada or Mexico. Very few are slaughtered in the US. Last time this bill was circulated an aspect of it was to actually ban the shipment of horses to another nation to be slaughtered. I'm not sure if this is a feature of the bill this time, but if that starts getting floated again, it is even more insulting. Again, we should be very careful about telling other nations what they can or should not do based on sentimental reasons.
All in all, this bill is just a bad idea. I'm around horses all the time, but we must keep in mind they are big animal, and they come to an end. Requiring people to keep them into their ultimate declining state is unwise in the extreme.
interesting, interesting. I think I can use this one in my class this semester. presumably this has not yet passed a Senate vote?
Thank you for your thoughts Yeoman. I agree with you entirely.
Jim, you are correct...not yet through Senate.
Post a Comment