Horse Haven of Tennessee does everything they can to education the public on issues that effect the welfare of our equine friends. The more information the general public has, the easier it is to try and bring an end to their suffering.
Giving a Voice to the
Magnificent Tennessee Walking Horse
Each breed that God has given us have their own beautiful traits. Their own style of movement that makes them stand out from any other breed.
Because the State of Tennessee hold’s the Tennessee Walking Horse as their State Horse, we hold them very special in our hearts. It is because of this we have posted this page to bring awareness to the cruel practices inflicted on them. We would like to encourage the public that instead of cheering the next time they see a “Big Lick” enter the ring, you will stand up, and turn your back to the show ring to show your disapproval of this type of display that goes against the natural movement of this exquisite animal and their defined gait.
Click HERE to read.
Informative Reading Links of Interest
Great place to keep updated: http://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2015/12/sham-bill-in-congress-from-horse-soring-crowd.html
Another article on soring with quotes and references to the Auburn study.
The TWH trainers association members that have won “trainer of the year” with violations and what the violation was. (Only 5 had never had a violation)
ELIMINATION OF OUR WILD HORSES AND BURROS-
What YOU should KNOW. How YOU can ACT.
The BLM (Bureau of Land Management) was entrusted with the protection of our wild horses and burros through the 1971 Wild Horse & Burro Protection Act. Since then, over 200,000 wild horses and burros have been rounded up.
The BLM has claimed for years removal of our wild horses and burros is necessary because they are deteriorating public lands and are starving. These claims areFALSE. The 1971 Act mandates PUBLIC lands for wild horses and burros. The BLM permit 9 million PRIVATELY OWNED cattle to graze on these lands (known as welfare ranching)
– 9 Million Privately Owned Cattle vs. 20,000 wild horses and burros: who do you think is deteriorating our land?
-The Cloud Foundation and others have documented wild horse herds for decades and has photographic evidence of their health and prosperity. Similar evidence exists showing farmers placing their cattle on the land from which wild horses and burros were removed .
During the roundups horses and burros are chased in extreme temperatures by helicopter, run from 15-18 miles to holding pens. The death toll during the stampede is remarkable: foals run hooves off, horses are trampled, and mares abort foals. They’re left in holding pens without shade, the weak and injured do not get immediate care, conditions are unsanitary and feed and water is not properly managed. Family bands are destroyed. Dozens more die after the roundups have been completed.
In 2010, the BLM’s roundup schedule was escalated. The 2011 roundup schedule is more aggressive. This is primarily due to interests that use public lands forPRIVATE gain: welfare ranching, mineral, oil and energy interests. In 2010, BP, BLM & El Paso Corp. contracted a gas pipeline running through five states and across public lands dedicated to the preservation of wild horses. The greed of private, corporate lobbyists (many are former members of Congress) together with the U.S. Government are destroying the habitat for these iconic wild horses and burros – at taxpayer expense.
Maintaining the horses and burros in “holding pens” costs nearly $70M annually. An $11M increase has been requested by the BLM for 2011. Allowing OUR wild horses and burros to live freely – on the land congressionally mandated – costs the American taxpayer NOTHING.
Please help raise awareness in your community and state. Let your elected officials, Department of Interior and BLM know we resent their mismanagement and waste of taxpayer resources.
What YOU should KNOW.
How YOU can ACT.
In 2007 the last horse slaughter plant closed in the United States because our government felt that there was no humane way to slaughter a horse. However, there is a loophole in the law, which allows our horses to be transported to Canada and Mexico for slaughter.
The idea that slaughter is a “necessary” evil because it terminates the old, sick and injured is also FALSE. Killer buyers (people contracted to purchase & transport horses to slaughter plants) can’t make a profit on the old, sick and injured. These horses left in “free pens” at auctions to starve and die while athletic, young, healthy horses are shipped to slaughter. Why? There is more value in their meat. Many stolen horses are sold to killer buyers.
Horse meat is TOXIC to humans. All U.S. horses shipped to slaughter are ex-pets, race horses, camp ponies, and show horses. They have all been given vaccinations, de-wormers and phenylbutazone (bute). “Bute” is the horse equivalent to human aspirin. ALL domestic horses in the U.S. have received this drug. It has been proven it may cause:
Birth Defects & Miscarriages Various Cancers Liver/Kidney Failure
There are factions in the U.S. trying to bring horse slaughter back to our country. Their efforts include manipulation of state governments, propaganda campaigns and the use of high paid lobbyists.
There is a bill to close the loophole in the law referred to as HR503 (House bill) & S727 (Senate Bill), The Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act. It would end the sale and transport of horses to slaughter for human consumption. Please call your Senators/ Congressperson and tell them to reintroduce and vote for this important bill.
Annually, 120,000 horses are slaughtered in Mexico and Canada for human consumption in Europe and Asia.
USDA statistics state that 92% of horses sold for slaughter are healthy, between 5-12 years old, and fully adoptable.
The idea that slaughter is a “necessary” evil because it provides a quick humane ending is FALSE. Horses are usually fully conscious through the process, therefore, they are butchered alive.
More Informative Links:
Animal Angels Video – very graphic
From the American Horse Council website http://www.horsecouncil.org/legislation/horseslaughter.php
Legislation has been introduced in the last few Congresses to prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption. House Bill
In February 2005, Congressmen John Sweeney (R-NY) and Ed Whitfield (R-KY) introduced federal legislation to prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption. The bill would amend the Horse Protection Act (HPA), which was enacted in 1970 to prohibit the showing, transport or sale of horses that have been subjected to any painful process to accentuate their gate. The Animal & Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture enforces the HPA.
The bill would amend the HPA to prohibit the shipping, transporting, or sale of horses for slaughter for human consumption. Such activities would be a violation of the HPA and subject any person who knowingly violates the Act to penalties of up to $3,000 and/or one year in jail for the first offense and up to $5,000 and/or two years in jail for a second offense. An offender may also be subject to civil penalties of $2,000 for each violation. The bill authorizes $5 million for enforcement.
The bill has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection. No hearings have been scheduled on this legislation. The bill had 148 co-sponsors as of late January, 2006.
Companion legislation has been introduced in the Senate by Senator John Ensign (R-NV). The Virgie S. Arden American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (S. 1915) would prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption. Co-sponsors include Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Trent Lott (R-MS), Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jim DeMint (R-SC).
History of the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act 2005-2006 The bill has been referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. No hearings have been scheduled on this legislation.
Congressional Action – USDA Appropriations Bill Amendment
The proponents of the federal ban have also sought to cut-off federal funding for USDA personnel who inspect horses at the three slaughter facilities.
Last June, during consideration of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Fiscal Year 2006 appropriations bill, the House approved an amendment that would prohibit USDA from using federal funds to pay salaries and expenses of USDA personnel to inspect horses intended for slaughter. The provision was included in the USDA appropriations bill on a vote of 269 to 158. The amendment was offered by Congressmen John Sweeney (R-NY), Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Jack Spratt (D-SC), Nick Rahall II (D-WV) and Jim Moran (D-VA), who each spoke in support. Speaking in opposition to the amendment were Congressmen Henry Bonilla (R-TX), Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Steve King (R-IA).
The Senate also added this provision to its version of the USDA Fiscal Year 2006 appropriations bill. The amendment was offered by Senators John Ensign (R-NV), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Trent Lott (R-MS), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). It passed 68 to 29.
The funding ban survived the Conference Committee between House and Senate negotiators over the final language, although in an altered form. The Conference agreed to the provision, but delayed its effective date for 120 days to early March, 2006.
The President signed the USDA appropriations bill into law last December.
Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, all horses sent to slaughter, and the process itself, must be inspected by USDA personnel. The expectation was that without such USDA inspection, the buyers of horses intended for slaughter will not purchase the animals or the horsemeat and the process will effectively be stopped.
Despite the de-funding provision, the Secretary of Agriculture maintained that USDA still had authority to permit the three U.S.-based slaughter facilities to hire their own inspectors and continue to operate past March. A petition to allow the facilities to hire private inspectors was filed with USDA and approved by the Department in February, 2006. This permitted the facilities to create a “fee-for-service” inspection system and continue to operate.
On February 14, 2006 a coalition of humane groups field a suit in federal court against USDA challenging the Department’s authority to grant this permit to the slaughter facilities. This suit has now been dismissed.
Congressional Action – House Passes American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act
On September 7, 2006, the House of Representatives passed the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (H.R. 503) on a vote of 263 to 146 after a four hour debate on the bill and several amendments to it.
Twenty-five Members of the House spoke during the often-spirited debate on the bill, expressing both support and opposition. Although six amendments were made in order for consideration by the House Rules Committee, only two were offered.
The first amendment was offered by Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee and an opponent of the bill. It would have required that the Secretary of Agriculture certify that sufficient horse sanctuaries existed for unwanted horses before the law could take effect. Mr. Goodlatte argued that the effect of the bill would be to increase the number of unwanted horses and his amendment would have required the Secretary to indicate there were enough facilities to care for these animals.
It was opposed by the sponsors of the bill and defeated 229 to 177.
The second amendment was offered by Representative Steve King (R-IA) and would have exempted “Native Americans and people from other cultures that eat equine meat” from the prohibitions. This amendment was defeated 256 to 149.
Following the consideration of these two amendments the House passed the legislation.
The bill was referred to the Senate. The Senate did not consider the bill prior to the adjournment of the 109th Congress.
American Horse Council Position
The AHC is neutral on the legislation because it has organizations and individual members both supporting and opposing a federal legislative ban.
Below is a great link to a broadcase that tells it like it is and what to expect if a plant is opened in your town.