Oppose HR 504
I do not support HR 504.
Memo from the American Horse Council
On January 14, 2009, Representative John Conyers (D-MI) re-introduced the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R.504). The bill, which has sixty cosponsors, was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Mr. Conyers is chairman of that committee.
This bill would criminalize the possession, transport, sale, delivery, or receiving in interstate or foreign commerce of a horse or horse meat with the intent that it be used for human consumption. It would thus apply to the transport and sale of horses for slaughter in the U.S. or to a foreign country.
Penalties would include fines and/or one year imprisonment for a first offense or one involving five or fewer horses. Offenses involving more than five horses or repeat offenders would face increased fines and/or up to three years imprisonment.
The bill introduced in the last Congress required that the “Attorney General shall provide for the humane placement or other humane disposition of any horse seized in connection with an offense under this section.” However, the bill introduced this year no longer contains this requirement and makes no provisions for seized horses. The bill amends Title 18 of the U.S. Criminal Code, which deals with animal cruelty prohibitions.
Wait, I’m supposed to be this lifelong horse lover, and I do NOT support H.R. 504 — Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 — why, exactly?
Because, for one, I don’t tell my neighbor what to eat.
I don’t want to eat horse meat. I like cows and pigs and chickens. You’re not ever going to be forced to eat a horse. But I’m not going to tell my friends that they can eat one kind of meat and not another.
You can even be a vegetarian if you like. If you want to be vegan, you’ve got that right as well. I don’t have a problem with that… unless you’re forcing your dietary choices on me. Then we have an issue.
We could feed a lot of hungry Americans with the current surplus of horses — often found neglected and underweight as evidenced by daily news articles across the nation — with no value at the local auction. Ask a hungry person if they care if their burger is from a cow or a horse. How many would refuse to feed their hungry children because horses are “pretty”?
This act would make it illegal to do something based on personal opinion, not logic or science or fact. It would effectively prevent horse processing facilities to open in the U.S. in the future, as it would be illegal to transport horses to them, severely limiting the options for an issue that will take generations to right itself… the overpopulation of horses in America.
When the animal rights activists led the battles to close down the remaining horse slaughter facilities in Texas and Illinois, they not only destroyed U.S. jobs but created a market that forces kill buyers to be picky. Now horses have to be shipped hundreds or thousands of miles farther, to Mexico or Canada, to facilities not under the supervision of the authorities that maintained guidelines for humane killing of equines. Now the kill buyers don’t simply clean up the mess, taking the horses no one wants, the older or thinner ones — they are buying young, healthy and fat animals for the same price since the market is flooded with surplus animals.
Do not believe that if the animal rights activists are successful in ending horse slaughter that they will be content. Already they have made progress in passing new legislation against common agricultural practices, driving up the prices of meat while eliminating jobs. Their goal is the end of the use of animals as food, entertainment, even companionship. This is a goal I cannot ignore or tolerate, especially when these groups pose as “puppy rescuers” to get their claws on the money of hard-working, pet-loving folks who have no idea what motivates organizations such as HSUS.
A new horse processing facility in the U.S. would provide jobs and a more humane end for thousands of unwanted horses. Do not take that option away from those who would benefit — the thousands of horses that break the hearts of the people that want to help but financially are unable to.
Please contact your representatives to voice your opposition to H.R. 504. Only a few decades ago, horse meat was a common food in America. Don’t let an extremist group dictate what your neighbor can put on his dinner plate.
Thank You,
well writen.Although I have no clue as to where you found info on eating horse meat in the USA.
Horse meat is eaten for dinner in France and Europe.and is a delicasey in other parts of the world.
Blessed Trails,TJ
As you mentioned briefly these animals are often neglected and abused when they serve no purpose. People can’t afford to spend the several hundred dollars it costs to euthanize a horse so the horses are left to suffer. Before they could make money by selling the horse at auction.
I challenge anyone who supports the Act to adopt a horse that is not ridable and serves no purpose outside of an ornament. Horses require land, daily care and maintenance. This is not cheap and the lifespan is longer than other “pets”. I deal with horses off the track but I will not purchase a horse that is not sound or is dangerous, the overhead is too high. I really don’t think that the animal activists understand the implications of the surplus of horses created nor are they willing to each adopt a horse to alleviate this surplus.
They should concentrate on the treatment of the animals during transport and at the facility not the actual killing of them. It is the means not the act. Their criticism and opposition of horse slaughter is misguided.