House Votes To End Wild Horse Slaughter

Bill Would Restore 1971 Law Protecting Wild Horses And Burros On Public Land From Being Sold For Food

(AP)  The House voted Thursday to prevent the government from selling off for slaughter any wild horses and burros that roam public lands in the West.

The 277-137 vote would restore a 1971 law preventing the Bureau of Land Management from selling the animals for commercial processing.

The protection was removed in 2004 when former Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., inserted a measure in a spending bill allowing their sale.

"These animals were earmarked for death," said the bill's sponsor, Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Supporters described the wild animals as American icons and said they are ending up on the plates of diners in France and Japan. The House voted last year and in 2005 to end the sales; the Senate never took up the issue.

"This is the latest overwhelming vote to stop the barbaric practice of horse slaughter, and it's now time for the entire Congress to finish the job," said Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States.

About 29,000 wild horses and burros were on public lands as of February and the number should grow by a couple thousand with births of foals this year, said Lili Thomas, a national wild horse and burro specialist at the Bureau of Land Management.

Thomas said the agency wants the number at about 27,000 to 28,000. On average, the agency removes 10,000 wild horses and burros a year, but the number falls as the herd size gets closer to management levels.

About 5,500 animals are adopted each year and the agency spends about $23 million caring for those rounded up and not adopted or sold, she said.

The bureau halted sales of wild horses and burros in 2005 after 41 of the horses it sold were killed. Sales resumed under tougher restrictions against sales for slaughter.

Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, said the bill eliminates a management tool for controlling the horse and burro population and preventing herds from destroying public lands by overgrazing.

He said the proposal does not prevent their slaughter for food because the animals are not supposed to be sold for that purpose by the government or used that way by the buyer.

Bishop could not resist injecting horse humor into the debate. "This bill is all hat and no saddle. I'm asking that the horse be with you and urge you to vote 'neigh' on this legislation," he said, interjecting a groan in his comments.

The bureau sells horses and burros that are older than 10 for commercial purposes for about $10 an animal if they have not been adopted at three auctions. The Congressional Budget Office said caring for the horses long-term would not cost more than an additional $500,000 a year.

The bill, H.R. 249, is the first of two horse slaughter measures Congress is expected to consider this year.

The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved a bill Wednesday that would outlaw horse slaughter nationally.

Animal protection groups have pushed for years to end the slaughter of horses whose meat often is sent abroad for people to eat, although some is used in U.S. zoos. But many horse groups and veterinarians oppose the bill.

Lawmakers stripped money for horse inspectors' salaries and expenses from the 2006 agriculture spending bill in an effort to end horse slaughter. But the Agriculture Department decided to offer horse slaughter plant inspections for a fee, keeping the three such facilities in the country in operation.

Instead, legal decisions have shuttered the plants. A federal appeals court has upheld a Texas law that prohibits horse slaughter to use their meat for food, closing two plants in the state.

A federal district court in Washington ordered the department to end the fee-for-service inspections, crippling operations at an Illinois horse slaughter plant.

[clestes-2009]

Good news and a step in the right direction. Finally Congress is taking the steps to continue the protections for America's wildlife and wilderness that Bush and his gang thought they could destroy at will.

[agnim]

Every once in a long while the government does a good deed and pass a good ordinance.

That demon, Conrad Burns, will burn in hell!

[terrapin78]

I get it. The Bushies see our troops like they see horses. Just property that can be used and abused. Killed if necessary.

[perception5]

We are happy for the horses.........Meanwhile the minimum wage bill STILL is not pasted by this DEM controlled 110TH DO-NOTHING CONGRESS..........if Americans think that any of the MAJOR issues of the day will be addressed by this poll-watching bunch of liberal Dems......they are correct........really sad

[zootallures2]

"This is the latest overwhelming vote to stop the barbaric practice of horse slaughter, and it's now time for the entire Congress to finish the job," said Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States."

The Iraqis need to get regestered under the Humane Society. Might be better than the UN.

[tucano2]

Well I was going to become a vegetarian anyway.

[homespunlady]

They're "protected" now but I do have a few questions.
What is going to be done when the wild population multiplies to the point that they damage or destroy the areas they're in?
Are there that many people out there qualified to adopt all the surplus population?
The increased deer population has caused a big increase in auto/deer accidents and fatalities around here. Are these animals kept from creating similar problems?
Do they run the chance of being disease carriers for domestic populations?
Are predators being used to control possible population increases? If predators are being used isn't that also cruel as most predators do not kill with kindness?
When they eventually die are they just left out there to rot or is there some other disposal method?

[mdk2dude]

I had to laugh at the last comment by clestes. I knew some sicko would pop up and blame the horse control law on Bush. When will the people on the left agree Bush may be a great president but he doenst control every facet of our (and horses) lives. Wake up and smell the roses or have a drink of Kool Aide, your choice.

[cfin5]

I'm not a horse expert, but is there a possibility that they could be moved to an area where they would be useful in trodding down underbrush to help prevent wild fires? I was just thinking if they were in place during a safe time for them to do that it would be a good idea.

[randalds]

"Bishop could not resist injecting horse humor into the debate. "This bill is all hat and no saddle. I'm asking that the horse be with you and urge you to vote 'neigh' on this legislation," he said, interjecting a groan in his comments."

This moron should realize that some people don't find the idea of us slaughtering these horses to ship the meat overseas (no doubt at a nice profit to someone) as something to joke about. No matter how you come down on this his joke was sick.

[texasproudmr]

Randal, what difference does it make to you if people eat horses? How many cows are slaughtered every day? Why is it OK to slaughter cows (and chickens and pigs and lambs), but not horses? Who are you to judge?

I don't understand why its so unacceptable to kill horses when society embraces the slaughter of so many other animals. Its downright hypocritical. You can't be mean to a horse, but you can kill as many of these other animals as you want?

[gunnerv1]

Oh No, what are the French going to do now? The other thing is: What are the "Do Gooders" going to do when there is an over population of wild horses and they are out on the plains starving to death (a slow and painful death at that)? Natural food stocks on the plains can only support so much. One last thought, Horses are not an indigenous animal to North America. They were brought here by the Spaniards.

[gunnerv1]

Don't go to Korea. Dog meat is the #1 thing,ummmmm Good, and so good for you too!

[randalds]

I don't understand why its so unacceptable to kill horses when society embraces the slaughter of so many other animals. Its downright hypocritical. You can't be mean to a horse, but you can kill as many of these other animals as you want?
Posted by texasproudMR at 11:08 AM : Apr 27, 2007

Because I put horses in the same group as pets and I don't eat pets. As far as I'm concerned animals like cows are not animals, they're unprocessed food stuffs. Same with pigs, chickens and lambs. So yes, it's fine to slaughter and eat them, but not horses, dogs, cats, etc. I see no hypocrisy in that at all. One group = food. The other groups = pets. Works fine for me.

[randalds]

One last thought, Horses are not an indigenous animal to North America.

Posted by gunnerv1 at 12:06 PM : Apr 27, 2007

Same with Europeans, Africans, etc. We're not indigenous animals here either.

HSUS and PETA a terrorist organizations. They have taken away my right ot dispose of unwanted and crippled horses in a humane manner. I personally feel we should have horse and dog meat available in our grocery stores. We are suppose to be multi ethnic society.......You horse/tree huggers can't have it both ways......Unfortunately those that have NO financial interst in a business try to tell those that do how to run it. This country is turning into a joke................