Horse processing is a private property issue, Stenholm says

[The Straight Story]

Horse processing is a private property issue, Stenholm says

By Doug Rich

Former Congressman Charles Stenholm said the horse slaughter issue is a private property issue. Stenholm spoke on the horse processing issue at the Kansas Livestock Association annual convention held Dec. 4 and 5 in Wichita, Kan. No matter how a person feels about horse processing, Stenholm said no one has the right to tell another person what to do with their private property.

The horse slaughter issue is a private property issue according to former U.S. Rep. Charles Stenholm, D-TX, who was a featured speaker at the 96th annual Kansas Livestock Association convention held Dec. 4 and 5 in Wichita, Kan.

Stenholm said he has become the unofficial spokesperson for this controversial issue after working with over 200 horse and livestock associations. Stenholm said most people in the livestock industry know that horses are livestock and that something has to be done with unwanted horses.

"We have tried to make it clear to those horse owners that do not believe their horses should be processed and consumed in another country--for human consumption--that we agree with them that their horse is private property," Stenholm said. "No one should tell you what to do with your private property, other than treat it humanely," Stenholm said.

...

"We need to at least counter the Humane Society and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) with their view of the world, which is perfectly honest from their point of view, and I accept that," Stenholm said. "I respect the right of people to differ with my opinion."

...

Stenholm said if people want to classify horses as pets then they should be ready for Congress to take away the tax deductions for horses as livestock. If horses are no longer livestock, what is the basis for a tax deduction as a business expense?

When Congress passed the ban that closed the last three horse processing plants in this country, Stenholm said they were warned about the problem of what to do with all of the unwanted horses. There are 120,000 unwanted horses in this country and that number grows by 4,000 to 5,000 head a year, according to Stenholm. It is costing taxpayers $50 million a year to maintain feedlots full of unwanted horses. Even horse sanctuaries are full and running out of money.

http://www.hpj.com//archives/2008/dec08/dec22/Horseprocessingisaprivatepr.cfm

[flvegan]

1. Guess he'd advocate dog "processing" and slaughter for meat

to export to other countries. He should try taking that one up.

[sandnsea]

3. But you know what

Maybe we should, when you think that 6 million children a year die from starvation.

[LeftyMom]

4. By that token, maybe you should quit eating meat.

It takes many pounds of corn/soy/wheat to grow one pound of edible animal flesh, so if you cared about starving kids you'd go vegan and free up some food. See how that works? :evilgrin:

Actually it's bullshit either way, there's already more than enough food, the problem is poor distribution due to a fucked up economic system.

[flvegan]

6. Oh, snap.

Taking the caloric expenditure route. Good show!

[LWolf]

5. That's EXACTLY what I was about to post,

until I read your response.

The horses out in my barn aren't "livestock." They aren't "pets."

They are partners, and family members.

From the moment, hour, and day a foal is born, people go about "socializing" them in an organized way. Teaching them to trust humans, and teaching them to work with us.

As a matter of fact, I have a filly born last spring out in the barn, along with her mother and her sister; a line that has been in the family, as family members, since 1945.

I showed her a horse trailer for the first time last month. She looked at the trailer, and her eyes got big. She started "blowing." I stood in the trailer calmly. She looked at me for a moment, and then just hopped in.

Just like that. Why? Because she trusts me. I was there when she was born, I handled her before she ever stood, I was there handling her every day from that point on. She learned to trust me.

I'm not alone. At whatever point a human starts handling a horse, it's about establishing trust. It's not like you are going to be forcing a 1000+ lb creature to do anything he or she doesn't want to do when they are fully grown. They do it because they have a relationship with people. Because they've been taught to partner with them.

"Processing" is a gross violation of that trust.

Ranchers who raise livestock for meat don't have that relationship with their cows, their sheep, their goats, their pigs, their fowl. They use squeeze chutes to manage them when they have to be managed, and they don't make partners or friends out of them.

I'd process Stenholm to feed the rare and endangered cats in breeding programs before I'd process horses to feed anyone.

[flvegan]

8. I think that's part of why horse slaughter is so taboo, but cow slaughter isn't.

At least not to most.

I loved your foal story. I'm happy to hear you bond like that with your animals.

[LWolf]

9. The older I get,

the harder it becomes to justify eating creatures even when I present myself as predator.

It seems like making sure that your food is not your friend is the first ethical line in the sand. We can evolve further, and I hope we do.

I live rurally, and am surrounded by people who raise their own meat. None of them attempt to bond in any way with a creature they will eat. And, of course, those creatures, while short-lived, have a better quality of life out in a pasture than those who exist in factory farms do.

In the big picture, feeding 6+billion people, the vast majority who cannot raise their own food, indicates a need to leave meat behind.

[flvegan]

10. Agreed.

Part of why I'm vegan.

[sandnsea]

2. Privacy rights don't extend to animal abuse

They don't extend to my uterus either, according to these asshats, but I don't expect them to get the irony any time soon.

[gravity]

7. I don't see a problem with it

If you eat beef or pork, then it is hypocritical to be against processing horses for consumption.

[MercutioATC]

11. No it's not.

Horsies are cuuuuute.

[leftchick]

12. all of it is wrong

perhaps this will make more people aware that eating mammals is not good for the environment or their health.

[FLAprogressive]

13. this turdbucket was Democrat? Obviously a Blue Dog. nt

[BrklynLiberal]

14. How about we institute some sort of Soylent Green type of program for ex-congresscritters?

You have any idea how much money is spent on their retirement pay, their health benefits, etc.? We could balance the budget AND supply food to lots of hungry folks.

[Vickers]

15. "no one has the right to tell another person what to do with their private property"

Woo hoo!

*turns on the grow lights*

:headbang: