Missy's Hope Equine Rescue Resource 

Home

 

General Information:

About Us

Contact Us

Mission and Policy Information

In Memory

Guestbook

 

Our Programs:

The Chey/Annie Project

The Chey/Annie Project Fundraisers

The Chey/Annie Project Accounting

The Chey/Annie Project Future Sling Locations

Current Sling Locations

 

Rescue Information:

Rescues In Need

Rescues In Need 2

Rescue Fundraisers

Rescue Links

Rescue Links 2

International Rescue Links

Horse and Rescue Updates

Rescue Warnings

 

Resources:

Horse Auctions

>Auction Reports

Rescue Resources

Horse Owner Help Resource

Searching For Information

Horses Wanted

Available Hay

Emergency Help Information

Equine Services

International Equine Services

Equine Events

Pet Food and Product Warnings and Recalls

 

Congressional Information:

Congressional Information

Wild Horse Information

Wild Horse Information 2

Wild Horse Information 3

Letter Writing Campaigns For Horses

Horse Related Petitions

There Is A Viable Alternative To Equine Slaughter

Horse Slaughter Information

Horse Slaughter Information 2

Horse Slaughter Information 3

Horse Slaughter Information 4

 

Horse Health Information:

Cushings/Insulin Resistance Information

Helping Your Horse Prepare For Being Blind

Articles Relating To Equine Blindness

Horse Health Alerts

 

Miscellaneous:

PMU Information

Other Items

>NAIS Information

>Helpful Articles

>Miscellaneous Information

>Horse Rescue Poetry

Nurse Mare Foals

Favorite Yahoo Groups

State Level Laws

This is a list of new state laws pertaining to animals in general.  This includes laws that people are trying to get removed or are trying to get added as well as laws that have been recently passed.

 
Alabama:

AlabamaPetsNeedingHomes] Alabama livestock law will leave horses to

Posted by: "Kitrynak@aol.com" Kitrynak@aol.com   kitrynak

Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:53 am (PST)
PLEASE CROSSPORT so everyone in AL gets the work out or
"if a horse is cruelly neglected or abused, your local Sheriff would not
be able to do anything about it."
In a message dated 2/16/2010 10:07:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jmeyer@gbhs.org writes:
Dear All - Please read this bill very carefully. It passed through Senate
today with NO objections. If this were to become a reality it would put us
back years in the animal cruelty world. The next step is the House of
Representatives. Please contact your representative (list at the bottom of
this email) and let them know that this is not acceptable. I know the cases
that we have taken in and how horrible the conditions of these horses were.
Please I am pleading with you all to pay attention to this bill - HB561 or
SB413 ( this is one that just went through the Senate).
Below are quotes from our county cruelty investigator, others from
Montgomery and some information on the bill that may help you if it seems
confusing.
"Everyone by a phone needs to call now opposing the current language in
this bill.
"What it says, is that the state Veterinarian is in charge of all cruelty
to livestock cases, which includes horses. If he doesn´t wish to prosecute
the cases, then NO ONE ELSE CAN. It´s very easy to understand with this
language. The Department of Ag has not been involved with these type cases in
the past, so why would they do it in the future. If this passes, no more
cruelty charges in Alabama for horse cruelty/neglect will occur."
Hello everyone-
There is a big problem in the Alabama legislature- that is, if you care
about animals.
Today, SB413 passed Senate Government Affairs Committee. This bill
prevents anyone-including law enforcement officers- from applying existing anti
cruelty laws to any animal that is considered livestock. It puts the entire
scope of law with the State Veterinarian, and the Department of
Agriculture. So, for example, if a horse is cruelly neglected or abused, your local
Sheriff would not be able to do anything about it. This bill CONSIDERABLY
weakens an already not very strong law, and basically puts the fox in
charge of the henhouse. What´s really interesting is that the Investigations
unit of the Department of Agriculture sent a letter to all Alabama Sheriffs
in 2008, telling them that the Agriculture investigators would no longer be
responding to animal cruelty complaints- that it is up to local law
enforcement to do the job.
TODAY, I received information that the agriculture investigators don´t
even know anything about this bill. So, WHO exactly is responsible for
investigating complaints of, say, horse abuse???? Well, if this bill passes, the
authority responsible for this is the same one that told the Alabama
Sheriffs that it would be up to local law enforcement. I am all for being
reasonable, polite, saying please and thank you, especially when dealing with
legislators. But, folks, the time is now to be firm. This bill cannot be
allowed to pass the House Agriculture committee. The House version is HB 561.
The contact info for the House Agriculture Committee Members is:
Thomas Jackson- Choctaw, Clarke, Marengo, Conecuh, Monroe Counties
334-242-7738
Steve Hurst Calhoun, Talladega Counties 334-353-9215
Mike Hubbard-Lee County 334-242-7739
Robert Bentley-Tuscaloosa 334-242-7691
Spencer Collier- Mobile County 334-242-7719
Randy Davis- Baldwin, Mobile Counties 334-242-7724
Chad Fincher -Mobile County - 334-232-7778
Alan Harper Pickens, Tuscaloosa Counties 334-242-7732
Earl Hilliard-Jefferson County 334-242-7684
Ralph Howard-Hale, Perry, Bibb, Marengo Counties 334-232-7759
Jamie Ison-Mobile 334-242-7711
Benjamin Lewis -Houston County 334-242-7756
A.J. McCampbell -Green, Sumter, Marengo, Tuscaloosa Counties 334-242-7747
Henry White -Limestone County 334-242-7712
Phil Williams -Madison County 334-242-7600
The message is simple- if your representative is on this committee; tell
them to kill HB 561. Be polite, but firm. Tell whoever answers the phone
that you live in the legislator´s district and that you do not want this bill
to pass. If we fail to move on this, we are failing living, breathing
creatures that depend on us to alleviate suffering.
Alabama has simply got to lose the reputation that this is a terrible
state for animals and the people who care about it.
Jacque
Jacqueline Meyer
Executive Director
Greater Birmingham Humane Society
300 snow Drive
Birmingham, Alabama 35209
O-205.942.1211/ F-205.942.1213
Cruelty Hot Line - 205.369.0392
http://www.gbhs.org/
Cheryl Flanagan
Horse Rescue, Relief and Retirement Fund, Inc.
http://www.savethehorses.org/
http://www.awionline.org/legislation/horse_slaughter/death_clock.htm
"I mop up. I clean up the mess left by morons who just have to breed their
mare." - Kill buyer Manny Phelps

 

 
Arizona:
===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

Arizona Bill Requires Creation of Approved Equine Rescue Facilities

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:01 pm (PST)
Arizona Bill Requires Creation of Approved Equine Rescue Facilities List
by: Kimberly S. Brown, Editor
February 22 2009, Article # 13649
Rep. Bill Konopnicki's Arizona House Bill 2178 would require the state's Department of Agriculture to create a list of the states "approved equine-rescue facilities and to make that information available on its Web site and in its offices," noted an article by James King at arizonarepublic.com.
The bill, which has been passed by the House Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee and is headed for the full House for a vote, also would be responsible for setting standards for these types of facilities.
For the rest of the article visit the above-cited link.

 

 
Arkansas:

House Passes Arkansas Horse Care Bill

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:58 pm (PDT)
House Passes Arkansas Horse Care Bill
by: Pat Raia
March 22 2011, Article # 17973
Print Email Add to Favorites ShareThis
An Arkansas bill that would allow equine dentists who are not veterinarians to float horses' teeth without facing prosecution from that state's Veterinary Medical Examining Board advanced on March 18 when it was passed by the Arkansas House of Representatives.
The bill, HB 1763, would prohibit the Arkansas Veterinarian Medical Examining Board from investigating or prosecuting nonveterinarians who float horses' teeth or perform equine massage until July 1, 2013. The two-year moratorium is intended to allow state lawmakers to study veterinary medical issues for later consideration.
The bill also exempts professional farriers, trainers, and individuals who collect semen and perform nonsurgical artificial insemination from investigation from the Arkansas Veterinary Medical Practice Act.
David Blount, DVM, Arkansas Veterinary Medical Association’s spokesman on the issue, was unavailable to comment on the legislation.
However, Arkansas Horse Council President Betty Miller Jones said most horse owners across the state would benefit from the passage of HB 1763.
“First, in this economy we need all the (teeth floaters and farriers) who have been working on our horses to keep working,” Jones said. “Secondly, there are less than 30 veterinarians in the state who care for large animals, or who have mixed practices, and there are 200,000 horses here.”
HB 1763 now moves to the Arkansas state Senate for consideration.

 

Fw: Horse Owner’s rights have been stolen…

Posted by: "Barbara Brown" bjdb64@gmail.com   straws1232003

Wed Sep 8, 2010 5:09 pm (PDT)
I know many (ok most) of you aren't in Arkansas so this doesn't apply to you, but I seem to recall there is at least one other member that is from Arkansas. You ladies from other states may want to check into your own state's laws on this. Oklahoma just got their law on this changed and we are tackling Little Rock next Wednesday to get ours changed as well. I know it's long but please read. Thank you.
----- Original Message -----
From: John R. Brochu
To: John R. Brochu
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 11:57 AM
Subject: Horse Owner’s rights have been stolen…
The current Arkansas law has made your Farrier, your Equine Massage Therapist and your Horse Dentist illegal.
Isn’t it ridiculous that the current law mandates that only a Veterinarian can shoe, float or massage your horse?
State Representative (and Farrier) Jim House has undertaken a study to reclaim the rights of the Horse-owner to choose who YOU want to work on your horse. Please demonstrate that we, as horse-owners, want the right to legally choose who we want to work on our herd. We all like our Veterinarians, but few if any of us want to be forced by the State to only allow our Vet to legally put shoes on our horse, float their teeth or give them a massage.
The study that Representative Jim House has undertaken will review the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act and implement some common sense solutions to the current problem that ONLY an Arkansas State licensed Veterinarian can touch your horse.
WE MUST LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD!
If you cannot be in Little Rock on September 15 to attend the hearing, speak up for your rights and your horse’s health by sending E-mail to the chairperson of the Agricultural committee, Roy Ragland, at RALSTONP@ARKLEG.STATE.AR.US.
Riding clubs, horse owners and the Arkansas Horse Council are firmly behind this common-sense study and possible revision of the current law. This is an issue that horse owners and most politicians can agree on. You deserve the right to choose the best health care for your horse. Your positive response will assure that this study doesn’t die from lack of interest.
HORSE OWNERS Your support is needed. ACT NOW!
Email : RALSTONP@ARKLEG.STATE.AR.US
Subject: JIM HOUSE-ISP: -244
Yours in Health,
John Brochu
479-582-1184

 

Arkansas Slaughter Resolution Goes to Governor

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:36 pm (PDT)
Arkansas Slaughter Resolution Goes to Governor
by: Pat Raia
April 20 2009, Article # 14000
A resolution instructing Arkansas' Congressional delegation to vote against a bill that would prohibit the export of horses to slaughter facilities in Mexico and Canada is now before that state's governor for his signature.
HCR 1004 was sent to Gov. Mike Beebe on April 3 after passing the full Arkansas General Assembly. The resolution instructs Arkansas representatives in Washington to vote against HR 503, the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act. The federal legislation prohibits the transport, sale, delivery, or export of horses for slaughter for human consumption. It also criminalizes the purchase, sale, delivery, or export of horsemeat intended for human consumption.
Arkansas is the latest state to pass resolutions opposing the passage of HR 503. Similar resolutions have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 7)
Others are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Idaho (HJM 005)
c.. Minnesota (SF 133)
d.. Missouri (HCR 19, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislation promoting privately owned horse processing plant development is scheduled for gubernatorial action in other states. Montana's HB 418 advanced to Gov. Brian Schweitzer last week. In North Dakota SCR 4021 and HB1496 await Gov. John Hoeven's signature (read more).
Related bills are pending in:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
----------------------------------------------------------
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.
Kentucky Law Addresses Deadbeat Horse Boarders - April, 2009
a.. Slaughter Bills Before Montana, North Dakota Governors - April, 2009
b.. Oklahoma Legislature Passes Cloning Bill - April, 2009
c.. Seized Chicago Carriage Horses Transferred - April, 2009
d.. Montana House Rejects Slaughter Bill Amendments - April, 2009
Equine Industries » Slaughter
a.. Slaughter Bills Before Montana, North Dakota Governors - April, 2009
b.. Montana House Rejects Slaughter Bill Amendments - April, 2009
c.. Montana Governor Vetoes Slaughter Bill, Suggests Changes - April, 2009
d.. Illinois House Rejects Horse Slaughter Bill - April, 2009
e.. Florida Poachers Target Horses - March, 2009

 

===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

Fw: Arkansas just passed a law...animal cruelty is now a felony

Posted by: "Horse Helping" horsehelping@gmail.com  

Mon Feb 2, 2009 9:18 am (PST)
Even Arkansas is getting wise!
Good news in Arkansas
Posted by: "tennwalker52@aol.com" tennwalker52@aol.com
Fri Jan 30, 2009 7:52 am (PST)
Arkansas has passed a bill that makes cruelty/inhumane treatment to any dog,
cat or horse a felony, this is a big step for Arkansas. The bill still needs
to be signed by the governor, but he has made the public statement that he
would be signing it. There is still a lot to be done here in Arkansas, the
Arkansas Horse Council is an embarrassment, but this is a start. I'm just so
happy this passed and I just had to tell someone.
Andi Elliott
PRESIDENT
HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UPPER VALLEY
IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO
208-681-4788 HSUV Cell
208-542-5337 Fax
WHEN YOU ADOPT A RESCUE...YOU SAVE TWO LIVES: THE ONE YOU TOOK HOME AND THE ONE WHO TAKES ITS PLACE!

 

 
California:

Legislation News

California:

There is a bill ,  AB 1980, going through the legislative process in California. This bill would make it illegal for your massage therapist, chiropractor, equine cranial sacral therapist, equine dentist, or equine body worker to continue to provide their services to you and your horse if they are not a veterinarian. There is a possibility that Chiropractors would not be affected by the bill but it is not clear in the language of the bill. 
This bill takes away your right as a horse owner to make the decisions about who you want to treat your horse. It is placing the decision in the hands of a Veterinarian Advisory Board and the legislature.
 It would deprive the specialists working with your horse from earning a living no matter what level of expertise or training they have. It contains all sorts of anti-trust and restriction of trade issues.
It is going to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday. It has been amended several times and so far has not had any opposition.
If you value the services your equine health care providers provide please contact your Senate, Assembly person and members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and add your voice opposing this bill.  It does not have to be long. Let them know you oppose the bill on the grounds of losing your freedom of choice in deciding on your equine health providers and the economic loss from losing the tax revenue and jobs.
PLEASE take 5 minutes out of your day to call or email your senator and assembly person (find them here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html) and tell them to VOTE NO ON AB 1980.
To read the bill go to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1951-2000/ab_1980_bill_20100629_amended_sen_v96.pdf
In addition to properly trained veterinarians, Chiropractors with full postgraduate training and certifications (AVCA or IVCA accredited schools) are also fully qualified to provide chiropractic care to animals, so please don't exclude them.
Please don't leave this for someone else to do...PLEASE CALL and tell everyone you know to do the same! Spread the word!
Kat Ripley

 

 
Colorado:

Co. News

Posted by: "Tommy Lee" phazzii@yahoo.com   phazzii

Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:35 pm (PDT)
[Front Range Equine Rescue - BLM round up]
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifr-ors.com%2Fors_2_live%2Fclie\
nts%2FFRER%2FCOBillDonate201003%2Findex.cfm%3Fa%3D1338
> Pro slaughter
legislation rears its ugly head; your tax dollars may subsidize it!
Dear Karen,
Several states currently have pending bills which directly or indirectly relate to horse slaughter. In Colorado, SB 139 would allow a check off on the Colorado income tax return for the "unwanted horse
fund".
This wording is highly misleading.
Taxpayers will think their money will assist horse rescues like Front Range Equine Rescue. Instead their money will fund a group that leaves slaughter on the table as a solution for unwanted horses.
Let me explain. An organization called the Colorado Unwanted Horse Alliance would receive funds from SB 139. This group allies itself with the national Unwanted Horse Coalition (UHC). The UHC was formed when
the movement to close U.S. slaughter plants gained strength over the pro slaughter agenda. The head of UHC helped coin the marketing slogan of "unwanted horses" to make everyone believe horses going to
slaughter had little to no other options.
While these unwanted horse groups talk about owning responsibly, they refuse to take a stand against horse slaughter. In other words, the option to allow horse slaughter plants back into the U.S. for disposition of horses is acceptable to them.
I'm sure this upsets you as much as it does me.
Those of us on the front lines helping horses in need rely on donations to run our programs. To have an unproven organization like the CO Unwanted Horse Alliance, which does not do hands on rescue work,
have access to taxpayer dollars is grossly unfair.
The poor economy and high unemployment are still factors for many horse owners, but bringing slaughter back to the U.S. is not an option!
What can you do to help us? Let your legislators know that you oppose bills which directly, or indirectly (like SB139 in Colorado), allow horse slaughter in the U.S.
If you live in Colorado, you can find your representatives and how
to contact them by clicking here
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.votesmart.org%2Findex.htm
> .
The Senate has already passed SB 139, now we need to voice our opposition to Colorado's House members.
If you live elsewhere, I ask you to send this message [click here toforward
<https://app.icontact.com/icp/core/message/forward?m=295608&s=69249481&c\
=D96A&cid=632087
> ] to your Colorado contacts and speak out against
similar bills in your state. Click here
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.animallawcoalition.com%2Fhorse-s\
laughter%3Ffilter0%3Dpendingbill
> to see if your state has pending pro
slaughter legislation.
This is a matter of life and death for our horse friends and now our own rescue funding. We have many challenges that face us on a daily basis, but we also have many viable solutions to help the horses. A weak
economy means a still greater need for our rescue efforts. There are now more horses than ever that need our help. A weak economy also means that some of our most loyal and generous supporters have been unable to contribute in support of our work as they have in the past.
I hope you'll consider a gift
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifr-ors.com%2Fors_2_live%2Fclie\
nts%2FFRER%2FCOBillDonate201003%2Findex.cfm%3Fa%3D1338
> to help us feed
and shelter both wild and domestic horses we have rescued from starvation, abuse or other situations of neglect.
Front Range Equine Rescue is a leader in horse rescue efforts and we need compassionate people just like you to help us as you've done before. I know I've asked a lot from you in the past and so far
this year. But I know that you are part of our team and who else can I ask; who will be there for our horses along with us?
Please contact the Colorado legislature
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.votesmart.org%2Findex.htm
> and
help us block efforts to allow horse slaughter as an option for so-called "unwanted" horses. Believe me, our horses are NOT unwanted nor are the ones owners cannot afford to keep.
We have helped so many people with re-homing horses or referring them to local hay banks for feed assistance. Our gelding program and humane euthanasia assistance help horse owners around the country. Our expenses are high, but your help allows us to say "YES" to so many horses. Your generous, tax-deductible gift
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifr-ors.com%2Fors_2_live%2Fclie\
nts%2FFRER%2FCOBillDonate201003%2Findex.cfm%3Fa%3D1338
> will help us
through the end of winter with high feed bills into better times for more of our equine friends.
Thank you,
[Hilary Wood]
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=69249481&msgid=295608&act=D96\
A&c=632087&destination=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifr-ors.com%2Fors_2_live%2Fclie\
nts%2FFRER%2FCOBillDonate201003%2Findex.cfm%3Fa%3D1338
>
Hilary T. Wood
President/Founder

 

 
Connecticut:

(no subject)

Posted by: "DEBORAH FINCO-KENT" dfkent@snet.net   lightningmom2005

Mon Mar 2, 2009 6:50 am (PST)

All,
Many of you are canine, cycling or equestrian enthusiasts so I am contacting you for your help. Recently the Groton Open Space Association (GOSA) purchased a parcel of  land in Groton  CT with the assistance of a 650K grant from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Their grant applicaction stiputlates that the property be assessable for passive recreation. However, GOSA recently posted signs on the property prohibiting dogs, equines and bicycles. I recently met with them asking them to reconsider this position. They stated that no one has complained regarding these restrictions on the property (other than me). I feel that many folks are just not aware that these restrictions have been put in place on land that was acquired with state money. However, they can choose the uses they want to  permit- apparently regardless of what they stated in their application which mentioned equestrian use and thus it is essential that they hear from you.
For Your information as stated in letter to me from DEP (below),  the land  they acquired is adjacent to two town own open space parcels that permit dogs, cycling and equestrians. Additoinally it is a means to get from to Haley Farm and Bluff point- two nearby State parks that allow dogs, bikes and horses . Anyway, I am sending this to you to ask that if you oppose their restrictions please send an email to GOSA and to the DEP contact (both listed below)  I would really appreciate your help with this since I think it is a bad precedent for open space lands to restrict use to so many users when state money was used to help secure such lands. Even if you do not live in Groton, please support the use of open space by multiple users.  If you have questions feel free to contact me. I suppose if you support GOSA¢s position you can let them know that as well although I hope you would re-consider. Please forward to others who may be willing to email GOSA
and DEP.  Do not forward this email to them- send your own email. They have already heard from me and need to hear from others.
Deborah Finco
Email I received from DEP (David Stygar)  
Ms. Kent
The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has worked with Groton Open Space Association (GOSA) to preserve the 76 ac. Merritt Property.  This property is now owned by GOSA with finincial assistance from the State of Connecticut, DEP, through the Open Space and Watershed Land Acquisition Grant Program.  For this assistance DEP holds a Conservation and Public Recreation Easement on this property.  Public recreation on this property allows for passive recreation which is defined as, more pertinent, non-motorized trail use.  Please note, there are other passive recreational uses allowed on this property.  While these activities are defined in the easement, they are not mandated.
What has been agreed to is that the public has the right to utilize/access this property for passive recreation.
The management of the property is under GOSAs' authority.  The Management Plan for this property, as far as I am aware of has not been drafted, and DEP has not seen a copy.  Your request/desire to use the property for equestrian purposes would not violate the permitted uses under the easement.  I believe that the contact you have made to GOSA expressing your intentions and desires are note worthy and the correct thing to do.  Issues that may prevent the property being used for equestrian use would be, trail connectivity, environmental, trail use conflict, health, development & maintenance and liability.  Should these issues be addressed in you correspondence/work with GOSA as they develop the Management Plan for this property your request would or should be favorably looked upon.
You are correct in that DEP does allow equestrian use of two properties located in this area, Bluff Point and Haley Farm.  Logic would have it that a continuation of the recreational trail resources onto and through the Merritt Property would and should be encouraged, and that is what DEP would support and encourage.
Stygar, David: David.Stygar@ct.gov
Groton Open space in care of Jim Furlong: jfurlong1@comcast.netor you can write tham at:
GrotonOpen Space Association
GOSA, Inc.,
PO Box 9187, Groton, CT 06340-9187
Telephone: (860) 536-9243
 Deborah Finco
Beech Brook Farm
http://beechbrookfarm.webs.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel,
because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind."
Dr. Seuss

 

 
Florida:

Bill in Florida Senate   PLEASE ask to pass this bill!

Posted by: "BHFER" bhfer@earthlink.net   horsn4fun

Thu Mar 3, 2011 10:41 am (PST)

Please cross post to get this bill passed in the Florida Senate:
URGENT - VOTING ON THIS IN MARCH - LET'S GET THIS BILL PASSED IN THE FL SENATE -PLEASE SHARE!
by Christy Lee http://www.facebook.com/christy0christy on Thursday, March 3, 2011 at 7:39am
Inspired by Little Horatio, a dog who was horribly abused, Sen. Mike Fasano has proposed an important bill to redefine the term "domestic violence" to include harming the animal companion of any household member or placing that person in fear of their animal companion being harmed.
TEXT OF THE BILL:- SB 206: Domestic Violence Against Family Pets- GENERAL BILL by Fasano; (CO-INTRODUCERS) Rich; Gaetz Domestic Violence Against Family Pets; Redefines the term "domestic violence" to include inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury against an animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by one family or household member by another family or household member, or placing a family or household member in fear of physical harm to an animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by that family or household member, etc.
Experts know that in homes where a spouse or a child is abused, the family pet is also likely victimized. According to the American Humane Association, 71 percent of battered women in shelters who have animal companions reported that their abusers had harmed, killed, or threatened those animals. Studies also show that up to 40 percent of battered women have delayed their escape because of concern for their animal companions' safety.
The Florida Senate will vote on this vital bill in March! Please contact your local representatives and urge them to vote in support of Senate Bill 206: Domestic Violence Against Family Pets.
Please forward this e-mail widely!
Sarah Sabotka - Cruelty Caseworker
This is the link to the actual bill: http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0206
This is how you locate your senator: http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/Find (There is a link here to email and phone.
This is an opportunity for Florida to really help the ones who cannot help themselves!!! Let’s get another law on the books like “Geronimo’s Law”!
Please share with all your Florida friends, so we can get this done!!
Thanks!
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/188474_1750688440300_1031527780_31918351_788246_n.jpg
Now going on 8 years old, the Catahoula leopard dog took so many beatings to the head prior to his rescue that he must now sport goggles to avoid bright sunlight. His abuser bludgeoned the dog as a means of manipulating his own mother, then 81 years old. Shown here in 2006, Little Horatio (not his real name) and his elderly owner were both victims of abuse.’

 

Please circulate and tell your legislature in Florida NO

Posted by: "BHFER" bhfer@earthlink.net   horsn4fun

Tue Mar 1, 2011 4:47 pm (PST)
A republican senator in Florida has a bill that would make it illegal to take photos of farm animals from a public street. Please crosspost and urge your friends/family to contact their representative and tell them this is a bad bill. This is how Richard Cuoto does his work and got the illegal horse slaughter houses shut down in Florida. Please don't allow this bill to become law! You can also submit comments below the article.
http://www.pixiq.com/article/florida-senator-photographing-farms-should-be-a-crime
Photographing Farms would be a Felony under Proposed Law in Florida
By Carlos Miller -... http://www.pixiq.com/contributors/carlosmiller
* Topics
* News http://www.pixiq.com/news  
* cows.jpg http://woofie1.pixiq.com/files/cows.jpg
They don’t call it Floriduh for nothing.
A legislator in the Sunshine State has introduced a law that would make it a felony to photograph a farm from a public road.
Yes, a farm.
The bill was introduced Monday by Republican Senator Jim Norman of Tampa who stresses that cows have an expectation of privacy.
Norman already has a questionable history. http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/local/judge-tosses-jim-norman-off-november-ballot-in-senate-race/1128349 
According to the Florida Tribune: http://fltrib.com/photographing-cows-or-other-farm-scenery-could-land-you-jail-under-senate-bill
Media law experts say the ban would violate freedoms protected in the U. S. Constitution. But Wilton Simpson, a farmer who lives in Norman's district, said the bill is needed to protect the property rights of farmers and the "intellectual property" involving farm operations.
Simpson, president of Simpson Farms near Dade City, said the law would prevent people from posing as farmworkers so that they can secretly film agricultural operations.
He said he could not name an instance in which that happened. But animal rights groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and Animal Freedom display undercover videos http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/default.aspx on their web sites to make their case that livestock farming and meat consumption are cruel.
I’ve never been tempted to videotape a farm before, but now I have the crazy urge to drive up to Simpson’s farm and film his cows from the side of the road.

UPdate:
 

Fw: Florida Trying To Shut Down Undercover Investigations of Farm An

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Fri May 6, 2011 2:48 pm (PDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: BHFER
To: BHFER
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 5:35 PM
Subject: Florida Trying To Shut Down Undercover Investigations of Farm Animal Cruelty & Neglect
If you’ve already received the below info I apologize for the duplication. If you are a Florida resident, please, I urge you to click on the below link and take action. If this bill passes many animals will suffer they will have nobody to be their voice. Thank you.
FL Bill to Criminalize Undercover Investigations Passes Senate (courtesy Animal Law Coalition) Dear Friends,
If you are a Florida Constituent, please take urgent action on the following bill that will criminalize undercover investigations.
Please click on the following link and take action!
http://www.animallawcoalition.com/animals-and-politics/article/1629
Thanks for all you do for the horses.
American's Against Horse Slaughter
This message was sent to rashm2@comcast.net from:
Americans Against Horse Slaughter | 1551 Willow Pond Dr. | Yardley, PA 19067
Sincerely,
Theresa
Beauty's Haven Farm & Equine Rescue, Inc.
A 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Organization
www.beautysequinerescue.org

Horse slaughter bills proposed in Florida

Posted by: "cdhanna9703@aol.com" cdhanna9703@aol.com   cdhanna9703

Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:43 am (PST)

Horse slaughter bills proposed in Florida
Florida Representative Luis Garcia (D-Miami) and Florida Senator Victor
Crist (R-Tampa) have filed identical bills to enact legislation making horse
slaughter in Florida illegal. HB 765 and SB1708, identical bills for the
House and Senate would make...
To read the rest of this article, please click on the link below:
http://www.examiner.com/x-25445-West-Palm-Beach-Horse-Rescue-Examiner~y2010m2d28-Horseslaughter-bills-proposed-in-Florida?cid=email-this-article   
--
Cheryl Hanna
Another Chance 4 Horses:  http://www.ac4h.com/
Horse Rescue Column:  http://tinyurl.com/cdhexaminer

 Update:

Good news on slaughter in Fl

Posted by: "Paula" horsehelpers@yahoo.com   horsehelpers

Wed Mar 10, 2010 5:32 pm (PST)
Senate Bill 1708 and House Bill 765 would strengthen the State of Florida's restrictions on the sale of horsemeat for human consumption, and increase the criminal penalties related to the unlawful slaughter of horses. On Wednesday, HB 765 was approved by the Agriculture & Natural Resources Policy Committee with a unanimous vote.

 

 
Georgia:

ACTION ALERT -- Georgia's Ag Committee -- RE: PRO HORSE SLAUGHTER LE

Posted by: "Misspostit" misspostit@yahoo.com   misspostit

Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:11 am (PDT)

PLEASE DO NOT HIT REPLY TO RESPOND !

________________________________
From: "satoashley@comcast.net" <satoashley@comcast.net>

Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 3:37:57 AM
Subject: Fwd: Georgia's Ag Committee -- UNCONSCIONABLE!!! PLEASE CROSS-POST WIDELY AND IMMEDIATELY!!!

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Hannah Tostensen" <gavoters@darientel.net>
Subject: Emailing:  Georgia's Ag Committee -- UNCONSCIONABLE!!!  PLEASE CROSS-POST WIDELY AND IMMEDIATELY!!!

Pro-Slaughter Resolutions Piling Up in State Legislatures
Posted Mar 16, 2009 by lauraallen
o                  Horse Slaughter
Take action now to oppose the many pending state bills and resolutions that support horse slaughter.
 
There are now several bills and resolutions pending in state legislatures that call for the defeat of the federal anti-horse slaughter bill, H.R. 503, and some propose to support horse slaughter operations in their states by first funding costly studies, calling for the location of a horse slaughter facility in the state, or creating special exemptions from judicial  intervention in the building or operation of these facilities.
 
Since Animal Law Coalition first reported this to you and in the past several days, there have been a number of bills or resolutions introduced including in Georgia, Idaho, Iowa and South Carolina.
 
Resolutions calling for the defeat of H.R. 503 have already passed overwhelmingly in Utah, Missouri and Wyoming.   
It is important to voice your opposition to these bills and resolutions. In addition to those in Illinois, North Dakota and Montana, these bills and resolutions are pending in these states:
 
Georgia H.R. 583is a resolution calling for the defeat of H.R. 503 and was introduced on March 11, 2009 by House Agriculture Committee members Reps. Terry England, Tom McCall and Gene Maddox, the same committee that claimed a week earlier there was not time this session to consider a bill to end the use of animal gas chambers and other cruel methods of killing dogs and cats in Georgia's public shelters. Apparently, they have plenty of time to consider horse slaughter and the implications to the state in encouraging this seedy, barbaric practice.
 
Find Georgia representatives here and state senators here. If you live in Georgia, find  your legislators here. Here is a list of House Agriculture Committee members.  Write (faxes are best) or call and urge them to vote NO to H.R. 583. If you live in Georgia, tell them you live in their District.  
Name/Title e-mail address Telephone/fax #s
Tom McCall, Committee Chairperson,Farmer tommccall@   bellsouth.net 404.656.5115  O
706.283.5436  H
706.283.6656  F
Terry England, Vice-chair of Committee
Agribusiness/Farmer englandhomeport2@   alltel.net 404.656.0183 O
770.867.1601  O
770.867.8096  H
770.867.2160  F
Dr. Gene Maddox, Committee Secretary
Retired veterinarian gene.maddox@   house.ga.gov 404.656.0152  O
229.377.1812  H
229.221.4595  C
Ellis Black
Farmer   404.656.0287  O
229.251.0303  C  229.559.1592  F
Jon Burns
Agribusiness jon.burns@   house.ga.gov
  404.656.0213  O
912.754.3439  O
Pat Dooley
Retired pat.dooley@   house.ga.gov 404.656.0116
Winfred Dukes
Contractor/Realtor Wdukes_2000@   yahoo.com
  404.656.0126 O
229.432.9891 O
229.883.8537  O
229.883.2188  F
Carl Epps
Insurance carl.epps@   house.ga.gov 706.884.6768  H
706.884.0408  F
404.656.7859 O
Buddy Harden
No occupation listed ohhjr@   sowega.net 404.656.0109  O
229.535.6050  H
404.909.5767  C
 
Penny Houston
Community Volunteer penny.houston@   house.ga.gov
  229-686-2467 H
404-656-0202 O
 
Lynmore James
Farmer lynmore.james@   house.ga.gov
  478-472-6391  H
478-472-5064  O
404-656-0116  O
404-656-0250  F
478-951-7339  C
Kevin Levitas
Vice-President -Legal//Marketing  for Hill Manufacturing Co., Inc. kevinlevitas@   bellsouth.net
  o                        404-634-9171 H
404-656-0116  O
 
Billy Maddox
Attorney billy.maddox@   house.ga.gov
  404-656-0109  O
 
Dubose Porter
Newspaper Editor/Attorney   478-272-5522 O  404-656-5058 O
Jay Roberts
Farmer jay.roberts@   house.ga.gov
  404-656-5025 O
229-468-5404 H
229-425-5404 O
229-468-7018  F 
Tony Sellier
Retired businessman, Farmer reptonysellier136@   msn.com 478-825-2888  H
478-827-0034  F  404-656-0265  O 478-827-0034  F
Chuck Sims
No occupation listed   912-384-7138  H
912-384-1234  O
912-384-1709  F
404-656-0287  O
Tommy Smith
Farmer  
  912-632-0001  H 404-656-5105  O
Contact Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue and tell him you don't support H.R. 583 and don't want horse slaughter in Georgia. 
 
The horse slaughterers' strategy   
These resolutions and bills are a not-so-subtle ploy by the foreign investors that own horse slaughter houses to defeat H.R. 503 which would ban the sale, transport, and possession of horses in interstate and foreign commerce for slaughter for human consumption. 
 
Even without H.R. 503, horse slaughter cannot occur legally in the U.S.  There is no point in states appropriating tax dollars for studies when currently horse slaughter for human consumption is not allowed in the U.S. These resolutions will simply insure horse slaughterers can continue to take American horses to Mexico or Canada for slaughter. 
 
There is also another goal: to make horse slaughter acceptable to Americans and, in fact, create a market in the U.S. for the consumption of horsemeat. The resolution proposing the North Dakota study says as much. If Americans begin eating horsemeat, the theory is that Congress will be forced to fund ante-mortem inspections. Under current law because these required inspections are not funded, horse slaughter is not legal in the U.S. For more on this.....
 
Keep in mind  when the remaining 3 horse slaughter houses in the U.S. closed in 2007, they were owned by foreign companies, Dallas Crown, Inc.; Cavel International, Inc. and Beltex Corp., which now operates a horse slaughter house in Mexico, Empacadora de Carnes de Fresnillo.  
 
There is no econmic benefit to any state in a horse slaughter facility. Even when there were horse slaughter houses in the U.S., they were part of a horse meat industry that was only 0.001% of the U.S. meat industry. The foreign-owned U.S. horse slaughterhouses paid little in income taxes. One facility paid $5 in federal taxes on $12 million in sales. These slaughter houses paid no export taxes, meaning the U.S. government effectively subsidized the sale of horse meat to consumers generally in parts of Asia, South America and Europe.
 
The profits went to the foreign investors. The communities where horse slaughter houses were located were left with horrific odors of dying and dead horses, blood literally running down the streets, and illegally dumped waste.  Attached are the numerous violations of Cavel's facility while it operated in Dekalb, Illinois. It is simply a waste of taxpayer dollars for a state to subsidize these sleazy practice. It is akin to supporting dog fighting rings.
 
If there is any doubt about this, read the Open Letter from former Kaufman, Texas mayor, Paula Bacon, who held office when a horse slaughter facility operated in her town.  
 
Horse slaughter is also not a means of controlling numbers of "unwanted horses". This is a myth perpetuated by the horse slaughter industry that is simply repeated over and over again as in these resolutions. 
 
Horse slaughter is a multi million dollar a year business that is driven by a demand for horse meat. Kill buyers buy horses at auction for slaughter, and the USDA has said over 92% of American horses slaughtered, are healthy, not old, sick, injured, or neglected. These horses were not unwanted; they were simply sold at auction, and their owners had no control over who purchased them.  Without the kill buyers who skulk around horse auctions, looking for the best potential horse meat, most of these horses would be purchased by others or end up in rescues or sanctuaries.  
 
As John Holland, a free lance writer and researcher on horse slaughter and consultant for Americans Against Horse Slaughter, has explained, "Kill buyers do not go around the country like dog catchers gathering ‘unwanted horses' as a public service." 
 
Americans Against Horse Slaughterpoints out, "Just over 100,000 horses were slaughtered in the U.S. in 2006. If slaughter were no longer an option and these horses were rendered or buried instead, it would represent a small increase in the number of horse being disposed of in this manner  - an increase that the current infrastructure can certainly sustain. Humane euthanasia and carcass disposal is highly affordable and widely available. The average cost of having a horse humanely euthanized and safely disposing of the animal's carcass is approximately $225, while the average monthly cost of keeping a horse is approximately $200."
 
Also, the horse slaughter industry actually encourages the over breeding of horses. Because owners can make money from the brutal slaughter of their horses, they have an incentive to over breed.  As actor and horse rescuer Paul Sorvino put it, "37% of those horses are going to be slaughtered because they couldn't run fast enough....So, it's run for your life."  If the slaughter of horses for human consumption is illegal, there is no reward for over breeding.
 
Sadly, pro-slaughter groups have disseminated disinformation in the media to convince the public that without horse slaughter, there will be large numbers of abandoned, abused and neglected horses.  (Even if that were true, which it is not, it is not clear how substituting one form of cruelty for another is somehow a solution.)
 
Indeed, these reports in the media have proven to be unfounded.  A study released last year showed  a decrease in horse abuse and neglect cases following closure of the last U.S. horse slaughter house in 2007.  Any abandoned or neglected horses are not a result of a lack of horse slaughter houses.
 
Historically, there have not been increases in abandoned, neglected or abused horses following closures of horse slaughter houses. In 2002 the Illinois slaughter house burned to the ground and was out of commission for some time.  Reports of abandoned, abused and neglected horses in the Illinois area were actually on the rise in the 2 years before the fire but decreased afterwards.
 
Remember the number of horses slaughtered in the U.S. dropped significantly from over 300,000 annually in the 1990s to 66,000 in 2004.  There was no notable increase during that time of abandoned, abused or neglected horses.
When California banned horse slaughter in 1998, there was no rise in cases of cruelty or neglect to horses. In fact, there was a 39.4% decrease initially and that rose to 88% eventually in horse thefts. (What does that tell you about this "business"?)
 
Also, from 2004-2007 5000 horses were imported into the U.S. for slaughter. If horse slaughter occurs because of all the unwanted horses, why would these horse slaughter businesses need to import them? The answer is, of course, they wouldn't. Horse slaughter has nothing to do with controlling numbers of unwanted horses. It is a business driven by a demand for horse meat primarily as a delicacy in foreign countries.  
 
As Americans Against Horse Slaughter puts it, "The ‘surplus horse population' [argument] is a scare tactic."  
Horse slaughter is also in no sense humane euthanasia. That much has been established by documents recently released in response to a FOIA request.  The captive bolt gun used in the U.S. slaughterhouses did not typically render horses senseless before slaughter. The slaughter houses never bothered to restrain the horses' heads or use only trained personnel to operate the gun.
 
 As John Holland has explained, "In its 2000 report on methods of Euthanasia, the AVMA stated that the captive bolt gun should not be used on equines unless head restraint could be assured. This is because of the relatively narrow forehead of equines, their head shyness and the fact that the brain is set back further than in cattle for which the gun is intended. It is difficult for an operator to assure proper placement of the gun.
 
"No slaughter house ever found a practical way to restrain the heads of the horses, so by the AVMA's very definition, the process was not acceptable. The result was a very large number of ineffective stuns. These misplaced blows undoubtedly caused severe pain until a stunning or fatal blow was delivered."
 
Imagine the pain and terror experienced by horses as bolts were repeatedly fired at their heads many times by untrained operators. Many times horses were still conscious when they were then hoisted upside down for slaughter.
For more information on the brutality of horse slaughter in the U.S., click here to read the July 25, 2006 testimony of Christopher J. Heyde, Deputy Legislative Director for Animal Welfare Institute, before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.   Click here to read testimony offered during a Congressional hearing in 2008 about the cruelty of horse slaughter.
 
Also, listen here to a discussion on WFL Endangered Stream Live Talk Radio about horse slaughter by Laura Allen, Executive Director of Animal Law Coalition; John Holland, journalist and consultant for Americans Against Horse Slaughter; Dr. Nena Winand, DVM with Veterinarians for Equine Welfare and Paula Bacon, former mayor of Kaufman, Tx and leader of the fight to shut down the horse slaughter facility that operated there until 2007.   (Download this broadcast!)
 
Then contact your U.S. representative  and urge him or her to vote YES on the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2009, H.B. 503.
 
Also, tell your representative to vote YES on H.R. 305, the Horse Transportation Safety Act, which will put an end to all transports of horses on double decked trailers.    
 
Where You Can Find More Information on Horse Slaughter
WFL Endangered Stream Live, Saving Our Horses
Read Frequently Asked Questions About Unwanted Horses and the AVMA's Policy on Horse Slaughter
Read Veterinarians for Equine Welfare's Horse Slaughter - Its Ethical Impact and Subsequent Response by the Veterinary Profession
 
Attachment Size
CAVEL VIOLATIONS.xls 94.5 KB
PLEASE HELP SAVE AMERICAS HORSES_Final.pdf 413.64 KB
o                  Add new comment
 
 
 
Please click to feed dogs and cats in shelters !
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=3
Generates donations of food toabused and neglected animals. 
 
Please click to help other animals in need !
http://babyseals.care2.com  
Generates donations to Seals, Rainforest, Oceans, Big Cats, Primates, Pets.
 
Please click if you can help !
http://www.imom.org/
To better the lives of sick, injured and abused companion animals. We are dedicated to insure that no companion animal has to be euthanized simply because their caretaker is financially challenged.
http://www.imom.org/pin/general/reba-pupa.htm
 "Helping people help pets".

 

 
Idaho:
===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/
 
Illinois:
They just put the bill on the calendar and it could come up today, Tuesday. They have several other bills to do, so the vote may not come until tomorrow. You can watch/listen to floor happenings at this link:
http://www.ilga.gov/house/audvid.asp
Please, keep the calls and emails going until the vote has transpired!
Contact info for reps:
http://www.barntowire.com/stophorseslaughter-Illinois-reps.html

 

Fw: [NE_EquineCrossCountryTransport] URGENT ACTION NEEDED! PLEASE TA

Posted by: "Horse Helping" horsehelping@gmail.com   eaglewhowatches

Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:03 am (PDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: Marge
URGENT ACTION NEEDED! PLEASE TAKE ACTION NOW!
Dear Americans Against Horse Slaughter,
At this time it is very urgent we focus all of our efforts to defeat the Illinois bill HB583.
The vote was going to take place Thursday, March 26th however, a motion was filed to delay the vote until next week. The vote is expected to take place on Tuesday. We will keep you informed if this changes.
We must realize that if the opposition succeeds, this could be damaging to our federal campaign.
Please see the following alert by AWI and Take Action! We need everyone from every state calling/faxing and emailing as many IL Representatives as you can. Please click on the following link for the entire Alert and for easy access to the IL Representatives.
Thanks for all of your help.
Americans Against Horse Slaughter
URGENT ALERT BELOW:
http://www.awionline.org/legislation/horse_slaughter/sacia_bad_horse_bill_2009.htm
This message was sent from Americans Against Horse Slaughter to redmm97@cox.net. It was sent from: Americans Against Horse Slaughter, 1551 Willow Pond Dr., Yardley, PA 19067. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below.

 

===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

Jim Sacia wins today in Illinois.

Posted by: "phazzii" phazzii@yahoo.com   phazzii

Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:44 pm (PST)

Im just so sick of our elected officals. they tell you one thing and
then follow the foreign profits and reward irresponsible people.
Horse slaughtering bill passes House committee [advertisement]
By State Capitol Bureau GateHouse News Service Posted Feb 24, 2009 @
04:25 PM SPRINGFIELD, Ill. —
A measure to repeal the two-year-old ban on horse slaughtering for human
consumption in Illinois is gaining some momentum in the state
legislature.
The House Agriculture and Conservation Committee voted 11-2 Tuesday for
House Bill 583, pushed by Republican Rep. Jim Sacia of Pecatonica, to
lift the ban. The measure now moves to the full House.
Sacia's veterinarian, Dr. Tim Strathman, testified before the committee
in favor of repealing the ban. To appease animal rights groups,
Strathman proposed adding a tax on horses at slaughter plants to Sacia's
measure. He said a $25 fee on horses payable to the state could then be
turned over to horse organizations to fund non-slaughter alternatives.
Former Rep. Bob Molaro, D-Chicago, testified against repealing the ban
that he had pushed for successfully two years ago. He said Strathman's
tax proposal does not address his concern that slaughtering horses is
always inhumane.
"I just don't understand how we can tell these pets who have served and
worked for us, 'We're going to slaughter you so Europeans can eat you,'"
Molaro said.
Supporters of the slaughter ban consider the vote a setback, but remain
optimistic.
"We're very disappointed by the vote, but we hope to have a better
result on the (House) floor," said Jordan Matyas, the Illinois state
director of the Humane Society of the United States.
State Capitol Bureau

Update:

--- In "Lucille Matte" wrote:
Forgot to add:  Call and ask them to vote NO to HB 583
Please send out to your lists.
I  just talked to Gail and she said the opposition really has a strong voice in Springfield, Illinois and we need to have a stronger voice.  We need to call and fax today we can not lose Illinois.  Keep calling please time is not on our side.
Follow this link http://www.ilga.gov/reports/rptMemberList.asp?gaid=10&ChamberId=H
to the list of all the house members.  Call everyone you can.
Here is a list of the Reps that voted in favor of a slaughter ban in 2007 please call them : )
Y Acevedo 

 Y Krause

Y Ramey


Y Arroyo

Y Dunkin

Y Lang

 Y Reboletti


Y Bassi


Y Beaubien

Y Durkin

Y Lindner


Y Beiser 

Y Lyons

Y Riley


Y Bellock

Y Feigenholtz

Y Mathias

Y Rita


Y Berrios


Y Biggins

Y Flowers

Y May

Y Ryg


Y Ford

Y McAuliffe


Y Boland

Y Fortner


Y Franks

Y McGuire

Y Schmitz


Y Fritchey

Y Mendoza


Y Bradley,Richard

Y Froehlich


Y Golar

Y Miller


Y Brosnahan

Y Graham 

Y Soto


Y Burke

Y Granberg


Y Hamos

Y Molaro

Y Sullivan


Y Coladipietro 

Y Mulligan

N Tracy


Y Cole

Y Harris

Y Munson


NV Collins


Y Colvin

Y Hernandez

Y Nekritz


Y Coulson

Y Hoffman

 Y Osmond


Y Crespo

Y Holbrook

Y Osterman

Y Washington


Y Cross

Y Howard

E Patterson
 

Y Jakobsson


Y Currie

Y Jefferies

Y Pihos

Y Yarbrough


Y D'Amico

Y Jefferson 

Y Younge


Y Davis,Monique

Y Joyce


Y Davis,William

Y Kosel
E - Denotes Excused Absence

 
Iowa:

Legislation: 

From: Tracey Smith <tdsmith.hall@gmail.com>

Date: March 7, 2012 9:53:38 PM EST

Subject: Act Now or Animal Abuse Will Be Illegal to Film and Expose 

Please check out this important information about a Utah bill that could hide from the public the truth about what happens behind the closed doors of factory farms.

-- 

Utah House Bill 187 would make it a crime to photograph or record video or sound of a farm without the farm owner's consent. This absurd and unconstitutional bill, which infringes on Americans' basic rights, is a desperate attempt by agriculture industry giants to prevent consumers from learning the truth about the lives and deaths of animals on factory farms. Past investigations of factory farms resulted in criminal convictions of farm managers and workers found beating, sexually abusing, stomping on, kicking, and throwing animals. 

The meat from slaughtered animals crosses state lines, and the government in Utah needs to hear from consumers across the country who care about the way animals killed for food are treated. 

Please click the link below to take action.  

To take action on this issue, click on the link below:

http://www2.peta.org/site/Advocacy?s_oo=4lLxLkHNsBzlBL3WSYG1Aw&amp;id=4031

If the text above does not appear as a link or it wraps across multiple lines, then copy and paste it into the address area of your browser.

-- 

From: Mburton@hopewellva.gov

Sent: 3/7/2012 2:36:39 P.M. Eastern Standard Time

Subj: new law in effect in certain states

Taking Undercover Animal Cruelty Videos Now a Crime, Say 4 States

March 4, 2012 

http://oascentral.discovery.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.treehugger.com/business/corporate-responsibility/taking-undercover-animal-cruelty-videos-now-a-crime-say-4-states.html/1127682849/Top3/default/empty.gif/51635247556b394f5a69594142646e78?x

-- 

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/iowa-bill-would-send-you-to-jail-for-10-years-for-exposing-animal-cruelty-on-farms.html

This week, after a year's worth of controversy surrounding an Iowa bill that would make undercover footage and photography at factory farms illegal, the bill passed the Iowa legislature. It's one more hurdle for animal rights activists looking to expose farms that break the rules. 

The Iowa bill makes gaining access to livestock operations under false pretenses a crime. Montana, North Dakota, and Kansas have already enacted similar laws and Illinois, Missouri, Utah, New York, Nebraska, Indiana, and Minnesota are considering such bills. 

"We have a number of activists that want to gain access to farms ... to take some films and make it look as dramatic as they possibly can, to affect the public," Craig Hill, president of the Iowa Farm Bureau, told the agriculture news site Brownfield. But animal welfare groups say that animal producers who want such laws enacted have something to hide, namely criminal animal cruelty. 

Videos Uncover Disgusting Practices

It's no secret that a number of massive animal cruelty rings have been uncovered as a result of such videos including when Mercy for Animals, an animal welfare group, http://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/undercover-video-footage-reveals-cruelty-at-one-of-nations-largest-pork-producers-video.html  released a video documenting disgusting conditions at Iowa Select Farms, one of the largest pork producers in the U.S. 

The Humane Society of the United States also released this cruel video

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/undercover-investigation-oklahoma-pig-farms-reveals-systemic-cruelty-factory-farming-video.html

investigating Seaboard Foods and Prestige Farm, a main supplier to Walmart and then there was when a

http://www.treehugger.com/culture/butterball-turkey-facility-raided-response-horror-video.html  

Butterball facility was raided in response to undercover footage. 

It's unclear whether these criminal acts would have surfaced without such footage and it's a sad day when farmers that engage in criminal animal mistreatment can hide behind the banner of a law which bans their

investigation.

 

 
Kansas:
===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

 
Kentucky:

Subject: Lots of Important Stuff on Legislation, New Video from Sandy Elmore & Petition

Just keep scrolling!

1) For MO, we are also encouraging contacting the governor. You can email him from this page or write/call him. I cannot find a fax number anywhere….

Office of Governor Jay Nixon

P.O. Box 720

Jefferson City, MO 65102

(573) 751-3222

2) Kentucky bill creating pro-slaughter board passes (HB 398) - http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1203

My suggestion for a talking point is that KY is the horse capital of the world. Every tourism ad or brochure has horses front and center. Is this how they treat their equines that bring so much revenue to the state???

Governor Steve Beshear

700 Capitol Avenue

Frankfort, KY 40601

(502) 564-2611

No fax number on the site but I have a letter from the former governor, Fletcher and the fax number on his stationery was 502.564.2517. I also found this…

Governor’s office: Katie Allison, Senior Policy Advisor Office of Governor Steven L. Beshear 700 Capital Avenue, Room 109 Frankfort, KY 40601 Email: Katie.allison@ky.gov  Phone: (502) 564-2611, ext. 302

Christina Smith, Assistant Fax: 502.564-2517 Phone: 502.564-2611, ext. 314 Email: Christina.smith@ky.gov

KY Bill to Create Pro Slaughter Board Passes Senate

Posted Feb 18, 2010 by lauraallen

o    Horse Slaughter

Update Mar. 31: Other than changing the name from "an Act Relating to equines" to "an Act relating to agriculture", the Kentucky state Senate has passed H.B. 398 by a unanimous vote. 

H.B. 398 has already passed the Kentucky House. This fast tracked bill would create a board openly named for the pro-horse slaughter organization, Equine Health and Welfare Alliance.

The bill goes back to the House for approval of the minor title amendment.  

What the Equine Health and Welfare Board will do

This Board would "[a]ssist, advise and consult" the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet "on equine health and welfare issues" and "[a]ct to maintain the health, welfare, and safety of equines". The Board would have the authority to hold public hearings, collect data and issue regulations. The board would be authorized to "develop regional centers of care for unwanted, abused, neglected, or confiscated equines", create minimum standards for rescue and retirement operations that would include a "voluntary certification" process; and advise on laws "affecting equine health, welfare, abuse, and neglect issues"; identify "critical areas of need" for veterinarians and "others". The Board would report annually to the Governor and the Cabinet and Legislative Research Commission on its work.

One of the first duties of the Board will be to assess the scope of the so-called problem of "abandoned" or "unwanted" horses. The Alliance acknowledges the information disseminated is largely hearsay. Indeed, much of it is false, planted by pro-slaughter interests in an effort to see horse slaughter return to the United States. Horse slaughter, of course, is not driven by numbers of so-called abandoned or unwanted horses, but instead a demand for horsemeat largely as a delicacy in some foreign countries. The USDA reports more than 92% of horses purchased and sent to slaughter are healthy. Nonetheless, horse slaughter proponents pretend slaughter is a service to dispose of "abandoned" or "unwanted" horses to get the public to support their seedy, cruel practice.     

The bill is sponsored by Kentucky state Rep. Tom McKee of Cynthiana.

Makeup of the Board 

It is unlikely that this Board will actually promote anti-cruelty laws and other measures to promote horse welfare. The Board is simply a front for pro-horse slaughter interests that will surely recommend slaughter as an equine "welfare" measure and at the same time control the rescues operated by horse protection advocates who oppose slaughter.  All under the authority of the Kentucky state government.

Under the bill, H.B. 398, the Board will have 13 voting members including the  secretary of the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet; the state veterinarian, a  representative of the University of Kentucky Gluck Equine Research Center; one representative of the University of Louisville Equine Industry Program;  executive director of the University of Kentucky Livestock Disease Diagnostic Center, or the executive director of the Murray State University Breathitt Veterinary Center;  chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture;  chairman of the House Standing Committee on Agriculture and Small Business; one  representative of the Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation with an interest in equine issues; one  veterinarian representing the Kentucky Equine Health and Welfare Alliance Inc.;  one member representing the Kentucky Veterinary Medical Association; and one member to be appointed by the Governor from a list of three (3) nominees submitted by Kentucky Horse Council; and two members at large appointed by the governor and who live in diverse regions of the state and who represent equine breeders and owners and agricultural interests.  

An amendment to the original bill added more representatives of equine education programs in several other Kentucky colleges or universities and one, yes, one member of the equine rescue community.

The Board would not be able to interfere with the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority or the Kentucky Board of Veterinary Examiners.

The Kentucky legislature is also fast tracking a bill to create a Livestock Care Standards Board that would have the authority to determine standards for care and treatment of livestock including equines.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Oppose this bill, H.B. 398. This is nothing but a power grab by pro-slaughter interests. If this bill passes, they will have a state sanctioned Board to push for the return of horse slaughter to the U.S., oppose the federal legislation to stop all slaughter of American horses, and control the rescues of advocates working to save horses from slaughter. Kentuckians don't need an industry weighted Board to improve the laws protecting horses or come up with ways to improve their care. They can decide these issues themselves through their local and state governments.

Contact Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear and urge him to veto this pro-slaughter bill, H.B. 398.

Go here to read how you can help pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress.

3) Kentucky bill HB 251 passes and sent to governor – This is the bill on stray equine. You can read the text here. As soon as we have more info, I’ll pass it on – I’m checking with Laura Allen to see if she has any direction or insight.

4) There is another bill in KY that is a resolution in favor of horse slaughter – HCR 47. You can read about it at this link as well as bills from other states that are part of the disinformation campaign. http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1162

5) New Sandy Elmore video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbXhYL7g7e0. BTW-I met Sandy in DC and she is as beautiful as her videos.

6) This is a petition that Nona sent me. There are signatures from around the globe to charge Salazar, the BLM and Catoor with animal cruelty. You can sign the petition here   http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/arrest-salazar-blm-catoor 

Vicki | A Voice for Our Horses

 

Another Kentucky Board, Pushing Slaughter Under the Guise of Equine Welfare?

Posted Feb 18, 2010 by lauraallen

The Kentucky legislature is fast tracking a bill to create a Livestock Care Standards Board that would have the authority to determine standards for care and treatment of livestock including equines.

But another bill, H.B. 398 (committee version attached below for downloading), would create a separate Kentucky Equine Health and Welfare Board. This bill also appears to be moving quickly through the legislature.

The bill is championed by the newly formed Equine Health and Welfare Alliance.

What the Board will do

This Board would "[a]ssist, advise and consult" the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet "on equine health and welfare issues" and "[a]ct to maintain the health, welfare, and safety of equines". The Board would have the authority to hold public hearings, collect data and issue regulations. The board would be authorized to "develop regional centers of care for unwanted, abused, neglected, or confiscated equines", create minimum standards for rescue and retirement operations that would include a "voluntary certification" process; and advise on laws "affecting equine health, welfare, abuse, and neglect issues"; identify "critical areas of need" for veterinarians and "others". The Board would report annually to the Governor and the Cabinet and Legislative Research Commission on its work.

One of the first duties of the Board will be to assess the scope of the so-called problem of "abandoned" or "unwanted" horses. The Alliance acknowledges the information disseminated is largely hearsay. Indeed, much of it is false, planted by pro-slaughter interests in an effort to see horse slaughter return to the United States. Horse slaughter, of course, is not driven by numbers of so-called abandoned or unwanted horses, but instead a demand for horsemeat largely as a delicacy in some foreign countries. The USDA reports more than 92% of horses purchased and sent to slaughter are healthy. Nonetheless, horse slaughter proponents pretend slaughter is a service to dispose of "abandoned" or "unwanted" horses to get the public to support their seedy, cruel practice.     

The bill is sponsored by Kentucky state Rep. Tom McKee of Cynthiana and has been approved by the state House Agriculture and Small Business Committee. The full House is expected to vote on the measure soon.

Makeup of the Board 

It is unlikely that this Board will actually promote anti-cruelty laws and other measures to promote horse welfare. The Board is simply a front for pro-horse slaughter interests that will surely recommend slaughter as an equine "welfare" measure and at the same time control the rescues operated by horse protection advocates who oppose slaughter.  All under the authority of the Kentucky state government.

Under the bill, H.B. 398, the Board will have 13 voting members including the  secretary of the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet; the state veterinarian, a  representative of the University of Kentucky Gluck Equine Research Center; one representative of the University of Louisville Equine Industry Program;  executive director of the University of Kentucky Livestock Disease Diagnostic Center, or the executive director of the Murray State University Breathitt Veterinary Center;  chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture;  chairman of the House Standing Committee on Agriculture and Small Business; one  representative of the Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation with an interest in equine issues; one  veterinarian representing the Kentucky Equine Health and Welfare Alliance Inc.;  one member representing the Kentucky Veterinary Medical Association; and one member to be appointed by the Governor from a list of three (3) nominees submitted by Kentucky Horse Council; and two members at large appointed by the governor and who live in diverse regions of the state and who represent equine breeders and owners and agricultural interests.  

If you didn't see anyone involved with horse rescue, animal protection or even animal control or law enforcement, that is because they are not included.

The Board would not be able to interfere with the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority or the Kentucky Board of Veterinary Examiners.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Oppose this bill, H.B. 398. This is nothing but a power grab by pro-slaughter interests. If this bill passes, they will have a state sanctioned Board to push for the return of horse slaughter to the U.S., oppose the federal legislation to stop all slaughter of American horses, and control the rescues of advocates working to save horses from slaughter. Kentuckians don't need an industry weighted Board to improve the laws protecting horses or come up with ways to improve their care. They can decide these issues themselves through their local and state governments.

Contact Kentucky state representatives found here and state senators found here (be polite) and urge them to vote NO on H.B. 398. Faxes or calls are best. If you get a voice mail, leave a message. If you live in Kentucky, go here to find your legislators.  

Go here to read how you can help pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress.

 

Equine Welfare Bill Passes KY Committee

By Blood-Horse Staff

Updated: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 12:08 PM
Posted: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 12:08 PM

Email Print RSS ShareThis

 Email A Friend

Close Window 

The Kentucky House Agriculture and Small Business Committee moved Feb. 17 to provide more protection for the horse.

House Bill 398 garnered unanimous support and passed the committee with no dissenting votes.

The bill will create the Kentucky House Agriculture and Small Business Committee under the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet to assist, advise, and consult with the cabinet on issues of equine health and welfare and will take action to help maintain the health, welfare, and safety of equines in the Commonwealth.

The bill will also create an equine health and welfare trust fund to be administered by the board to promote equine health, welfare, and safety.
HB 398 is sponsored by Democratic Rep. Tom McKee, who chairs the house agriculture and Small business committee.

“This bill will move the horse industry forward,” said McKee, a Harrison County farmer, in a release. “We are concerned about the health and welfare of the horse, and this bill helps address those concerns.”

Co-sponsoring the bipartisan legislation are Democratic Reps. Royce Adams, Charlie Hoffman, Don Pasley, Kent Stevens, Susan Westrom, and Wilson Stone; and Republican Rep. Ron Crimm. The bill now heads to the full House of Representatives for consideration.

The bill is the first major initiative of the newly-formed Equine Health and Welfare Alliance, a Kentucky-based corporation dedicated to the proper care, maintenance, and treatment of horses. Organized by a group of leading equine veterinarians, EHWA is the first organization in the United States dedicated solely to improving the care and welfare of these animals.

While the core membership and origin of EHWA consists of veterinarians, the Alliance is not limited to veterinarians and welcomes the involvement of other individuals, organizations, philanthropies, and companies interested in improving the welfare of the horse.

“While Kentucky is recognized world-wide for its equine industry, many horses and other equines in the Commonwealth, particularly those outside of Thoroughbred racing circles, may be subject to inhumane treatment and some horse-rescue operations in the state lack the standards of quality needed or lack sufficient oversight,” said Dr. Doug Byars, a founding member of the EHWA and a well-known equine veterinarian from Georgetown, Ky, in a statement.

“This legislation will help protect the equine, who cannot take care of themselves, and help make Kentucky a leader in the nation in the area of care and welfare for all equine.”
The Kentucky Equine Health and Welfare Board will have responsibility for the following:
--Undertake research, conduct public hearings, and collect data to determine prevalent equine health and welfare issues.
--Strive to develop regional centers of care for unwanted, abused, neglected, or confiscated equines.
--Create a system of voluntary certification of equine rescue and retirement operations that meet industry-accepted standards for care of equines.
--Research and offer suggestions for statutory changes affecting equine health, welfare, abuse, and neglect issues.
--Assist veterinarians and others in maintaining the health and welfare of equines by identifying and referring to the appropriate authorities critical areas of need.
For more information, and to follow the progress of HB 398, visit www.equinehealthandwelfare.org.

 

I am asking you to please CALL (no emails on this) your representative to urge them to vote NO to this bill. Please forward to any KY resident who you feel will do the same.

Link to finding your rep-
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/legislators.htm

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/10RS/HB398.htm HB398

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/10RS/SB105.htm SB105

Read articles below- "created in an effort to stop animal rights activists from invading the Bluegrass State"??? How can one say that and have "equine welfare" on their mind???

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20100204/BUSINESS/2040336/1024/NEWS0101/Senate+committee+passes+farm+animal+welfare+bill

http://www.kentuckyhorse.org/en/art/724/

This proposed committee has one agenda and thats to make horses profitable again. They are hiding behind a welfare issue and thats clearly not the truth of the matter. Please help the horses by urging your reps to vote NO!

 

Kentucky Bills Boost Barn Operators, Rescues

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:18 am (PST)

Kentucky Bills Boost Barn Operators, Rescues
by: Pat Raia
February 20 2009, Article # 13646
Kentucky's House Agriculture and Small Business Committee last week approved two bills intended to help boarding barn operators and horse rescues cope with the negative economy.
Sponsored by Rep. Dwight Butler, HR 418 expands local government authority to collect stray or abandoned horses and place them with caretakers. It also allows caretakers to recoup care costs from owners who later reclaim their horses.
HB 331, sponsored by Rep. Royce Adams, allows barn operators to sell horses 45 days after their owners fail to pay board bills. Current law requires barn operators to file a lien to recover delinquent board fees.
Adams' bill reduces the investment barn operators are forced to make when horses owners default on board fees, said Madelyn Millard, operator of Goose Creek Stables near Lexington.
"In one situation it took me two years to go through the system and sell a horse for a board bill. And with grain at $11 a bag and hay at $11 a bale, it gets expensive. Something had to be done," Millard said.
Similarly, Butler's bill helps equine rescues cope with the economy-driven rise in abandoned horses.
"People refer to the unwanted horses issue, but it's really a business issue for people who care for these horses," said Kentucky Horse Council Executive Director Ginny Grulke.
Both bills move to the Kentucky House for approval next week.

 

 
Louisiana:

LA - Fw: Some animal cruelty convictions would require registration under House proposal

----- Original Message -----

From: tipster@bellsouth.net

To: tipster@bellsouth.net

Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 1:32 PM

Subject: Some animal cruelty convictions would require registration under House proposal

Link to news below http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/some_animal_cruelty_conviction.html

 

 
Maine:

Kudos to Maine

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Wed Apr 20, 2011 5:41 am (PDT)
Kudos to Maine for introducing legislation to ban horse slaughter for human consumption.
http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1722
Marge
"You can't be liberated in your thinking if you're conservative in your approach."

 

Fwd: Boarding Stable License - Legislative Hearing Information

Posted by: "Melissa Moran" hopebrookfarm@gmail.com   horsesnhoundsmb

Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:26 pm (PST)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: jacqui byron <jacquibyron@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Subject: Fwd: Boarding Stable License - Legislative Hearing Information
To: All
If you think this doesn't affect you because you don't own a boarding
stable, think again. Anyone who owns a horse will eventually be affected by
this legislation, through increased costs or inconvenience! This is going
to open a whole can of worms!
Hey you guys you need to pay attention to this.. another way to extract
money from horse owners.....CALL or email YOUR REPRESENTATIVE . and oppose
this..NOW....
------------------------------
From: jjennings@mainefarmbureau.com
To: jp2745@aol.com
Sent: 2/19/2009 4:09:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Boarding Stable License - Legislative Hearing Information
[image: Maine Farm Bureau]
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jon Olson
1-800-639-2126
Maine Farm Bureau
Public Hearing on LD 458 - Resolve, Directing the Department of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Resources to Develop Recommendations for the Licensing of
Equine Facilities
February 19, 2009
Dear Maine Farm Bureau Equine Member:
On Wednesday, February 25, the 124th Legislature's Agriculture, Conservation
and Forestry Committee has scheduled a
public hearing on *LD 458 - Resolve, Directing the Department of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources to Develop Recommendations for the
Licensing of Equine Facilities *sponsored by Senator John Nutting
(D-Androscoggin). The hearing will be held in room 206 of the Cross State
Office Building
beginning at *9:30 a.m.*
**
This bill requires the Department of Agriculture to develop a proposal for
licensing equine boarding stables. The proposal must include a definition
of "equine boarding facility" that specifies the minimum number of equines
kept to meet the definition and require a license. The proposal must
include a graduated fee schedule that increases with the number of equines
kept. The proposal must include provisions for inspections of licensed
equine boarding facilities by state humane agents. Finally, the Department
of Agriculture is required to submit legislation for licensing equine
boarding stables to the Second Regular Session of the 124th Legislature no
later than January 5, 2010.
Maine Farm Bureau opposes this legislation and will so testify at the
hearing on the 25th.
We are asking you to attend the hearing to voice your opposition as well. If
you cannot attend the hearing, then please call or email your legislators in
opposition.
Thank you for your attention. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Jon Olson
Executive Secretary

Update:

MHA UPDATE on LD 458

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Fri Mar 6, 2009 10:40 am (PST)
The public hearing on Maine LD 458 proposed legislation was held this past week. We wanted you to receive this update. Each portion below that we share with you comes from different places, all with legitimate points. Please read and realize MHA members still need to have their voice be heard!
Only four people testified in support of the bill. One of these was the bill's sponsor. He claimed in his opening statement that the majority of complaints about mistreated horses involved horses in boarding stables. This was hard to believe and then came.... Norma Worley, Director of Maine Animal Welfare. She spoke in opposition to the bill and produced statistics about horse mistreatment complaints in the past two years. She stated that in the past two years the department investigated 561 complaints about horse mistreatment. Of these, only 1 case involved a boarding stable. This really blows a hole in the argument that this bill is needed.
There were about 15 people who spoke against the bill. One of the speakers stated that there are 35,000 horses in the state right now. If you assume that the two years of complaints were divided equally between the two years, this gives an abuse percentage of 0.8% with less than 0.2% of these involving a boarding facility. This certainly smacks of trying to kill flies with a sledgehammer.
The Agriculture Committee will be holding working sessions to work out language. We encourage MHA members to contact your legislators; you should let them know they should not proceed with this bill. Many feel that the bill's sponsor was either sold a bill of goods by a local equine rescue person (who has actually come into the ring at shows before just to stop the show) or he is simply playing politics.
Stables contribute to the state economy, enrich peopleb s lives, and provide education.
We are opposed to LD 458 as it would place an additional economic burden upon the horse industry. Despite hurting stables with additional costs, it is doubtful if the fees raised would even begin to cover the costs of administering this program. As far as who would provide and enforce the standards of horse care, it is ironic that stable owners are the people with the most knowledge regarding this. Currently it is self governed and we do not believe there is a problem regarding neglect nor abuse of horses in the State of Maine . If the State of Maine really wants to become involved in the horse industry, energies could be better used providing education regarding horses, their care, use, and enjoyment. If horse sports were promoted in Maine rather than further regulated, both stable owners and horses would benefit.
The Maine Farm Bureau is opposed to LD 458 for a number of reasons.
If the goal of this bill is to raise money for the animal welfare program, then it won't be successful. All of the money raised by the license fees will have to be used for the administration and inspection of this program. For example, in this legislation there is no mention of standards of care for horses. Who will develop these?
If the goal of this bill is to inspect boarding facilities to protect horses, then it won't be successful either. I know of a person that each year pays a licensing fee for her equine rescue facility. She has never been inspected.
We are also troubled about who will do the inspections. The bill calls for state human agents. We question whether they have the understanding of different horse breeds, physiologies of horses etc.
We also don't know if there is a problem of horse neglect or abuse done by owners of equine boarding facilities.
We would prefer that more emphasis be place on education and information about the care of horses, rather than strict rules.
Massachussets now has a law similar on their books. Originally this started the same way... and then they started taxing everything and everyone involved, including bathrooms! Now this has even spread to the horse owner who keeps their horses at home! This has become a money pit where dollars keep getting paid into the state by horse owners and nothing good has come from it. There is a real fear that each horse could end up being tracked via branding and costs would sky-rocket if this takes effect.
Considering all that we have now shared, we invite you to become involved with calls, letters, and emails to your local state representatives to stop this before it goes any further.
MHA~working hard for our members!

 

 
Maryland:

Just Days Away: Maryland Votes On New Anti-Cruelty Bill

This Thursday, the Maryland House of Delegates will hear a bill (H.B. 265) that would increase the maximum prison sentence for misdemeanor animal cruelty crimes to one year. This bill would also allow judges to prohibit offenders from ever owning an animal again. Currently, the maximum penalty for starving an animal or harming one unnecessarily is only 90 days in jail—a slap on the wrist compared to the seriousness of many animal cruelty crimes. Alley Cat Allies supports this bill, which will allow prosecutors to punish these crimes appropriately and protect more animals from suffering in the future. And the animals may not be the only ones protected—research has shown that people who are violent toward animals are more likely to be violent toward people. If you are a Maryland resident and have not already taken action, please help advocate for this powerful legislation by sending a letter to your state representatives today.

Maryland Residents—Take Action!  »
Don't live in Maryland? Find out how you can take action for cats in your community »

 

 
Massachusetts:

MA residents: Call state senators to cosponsor horse slaughter ban T

Posted by: "Beth :)" fatoldfarmwife@verizon.net   bethofneer

Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:12 pm (PST)
Subject: MA residents: Call state senators to cosponsor horse slaughter ban TODAY!
A special request to our area rescues:
please forward this to all of your supporters that you have email addresses for. Thanks!
Anyone can contact me at this email address for more info and to stay in the loop as the bill progresses. People will make the difference in horse welfare!
Please act on this today and forward far and wide to your animal-loving friends! Horses need you to take action today! Thanks for helping horses!
MA Residents: Call State Senators to Co-Sponsor Horse Slaughter Ban
(courtesy Animal Law Coalition)
Massachusetts state Sen. Stephen Brewer plans to introduce and sponsor the attached bill, Senate Docket 228, to ban horse slaughter for human consumption in Massachusetts.
The bill was drafted by Equine Welfare Alliance and Animal Law Coalition working with the Massachusetts state chapter of Americans Against Horse Slaughter.
If you are a Massachusetts resident, please contact your state senator whom you can find by going to this site: http://www.malegislature.gov/people/findmylegislator  Ask your state senator to co-sponsor the bill
to ban horse slaughter by contacting Sen. Brewer's aide, Alicia Bandy at Alicia.Bandy@masenate.gov or Phone: 617-722-1540/Fax: 617-722-1078. Do not contact Ms. Bandy yourself; have your state senator contact her. She only wants to hear from state senators interested in co-sponsoring the ban. The deadline for obtaining co-sponsors is Feb. 4, 2011! So there is no time to waste.
While a ban on horse slaughter for human consumption in Massachusetts will not end the slaughter of American horses elsewhere, it will certainly protect horses in Massachusetts and prevent sale and shipment of horses from Massachusetts for slaughter for human consumption. The bill would also prevent buyers from shipping horses for slaughter through the commonwealth. More than anything, this bill will send a message to Congress and the President that Massachusetts supports a federal ban on this arcane and cruel practice of horse slaughter.
Talking Points:
1. Horses are our companions and pets; they helped build this country and still work in the military and law enforcement and, provide entertainment in horse racing, shows and other sports and exhibitions. Horses are not raised for food in the U.S.
2. The slaughter of horses simply cannot be made humane: Dr. Lester Friedlander, DVM & former Chief USDA Inspector, told Congress in 2008 that the captive bolt used to slaughter horses is simply not effective. Horses, in particular, are very sensitive about anything coming towards their heads and cannot be restrained as required for effective stunning. Dr. Friedlander stated, "These animals regain consciousness 30 seconds after being struck, they are fully aware they are being vivisected." The Government Accountability Office and dozens of veterinarians and other witnesses have confirmed that ineffective stunning is common and animals are conscious during slaughter.
3. The FDA does not regulate American horsemeat as food because there is no market for it in the U.S. and most importantly, horsemeat is dangerous, if not deadly, for humans to consume. Horses are given all manner of drugs, steroids, de-wormers and ointments throughout their lives. Horses are not tracked and typically may have several owners. A kill buyer has no idea of the veterinary or drug history of a horse taken to slaughter, and many of the most dangerous drugs have no or a very long withdrawal period. A typical drug given routinely to horses like aspirin, Bute, is a carcinogen and can cause aplastic anemia in humans. Bute is banned in all food producing animals and there is no withdrawal period.
4. The availability of slaughter actually increases the numbers of excess horses on the market. Slaughter creates a salvage or secondary market that encourages overbreeding. Banning slaughter would reduce the number of excess horses. Slaughter is not "an alternative" for so called unwanted horses or horses in need. Slaughter is a for profit industry driven by a demand for horsemeat, and has nothing to do with the numbers of excess or unwanted horses. Slaughter actually encourages overbreeding and adds to the problem of horses in need. The USDA has confirmed more than 92% of horses that end up at slaughter are healthy; they are not unwanted, neglected or abused. Horses are in need right now because of the economy and, in fact, slaughter is still available which is further proof that lack of slaughter does not result in excess or unwanted horses. Just the opposite!
For more information: log onto http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1519   
This message was sent from Americans Against Horse Slaughter to. It was sent from: Americans Against Horse Slaughter, 1551 Willow Pond Dr., Yardley, PA 19067. Email Marketing by
Kathryn Webers
Massachusetts State Coordinator, Americans Against Horse Slaughter
http://www.americanhorsemeat.com/Home.php
http://massachusettsbloggingupdates.blogspot.com/
http://www.americansagainsthorseslaughter.com/
Find your elected officials: http://www.votesmart.org/
“What is it that should trace the insuperable line? . . .
The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they
suffer? “
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

 

 
Minnesota:

FYI.  Please forward and post on Facebook.  Thanks.  

(First FL and now MN.  Info about FL is included after the message.)     

-----Original Message-----
From: Adele Mirshak
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 9:13 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: Five Years In Jail For Exposing Animal Abuses In Minnesota

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Connie Curnow <cscurnow@msn.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:31 PM
Subject: Five Years In Jail For Exposing Animal Abuses In Minnesota

Five Years In Jail For Exposing Animal Abuses In Minnesota 

If a new Minnesota bill becomes law, anyone caught going undercover to film or record animal abuses at a factory farm could be sentenced to five years in jail.
Minnesota Joins Iowa And Florida In Criminalizing Animal Activists....this is wrong! 

http://www.care2.com/causes/animal-welfare/blog/five-years-in-jail-for-exposing-animal-abuses-in-minnesota/

--

http://justonemorepet.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/undercover-humane-investigations-to-be-banned-in-minnesota/

-- 

http://blacktalkradionetwork.com/profiles/blogs/welfare-five-years-in-jail-for?xg_source=activity

-- 

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22815.cfm

-- 

http://community.thenest.com/cs/ks/forums/thread/51871185.aspx

-- 

http://www.planetoceanalliance.org/forum/showthread.php/13811-Undercover-Animal-Abuse-Video-Terrorism-Must-Stop

-- 

http://www.capwiz.com/aspca/issues/alert/?alertid=37364501&type=ST

--

SIGN HERE! SIGN NOW! SHARE IT!
http://www.change.org/petitions/fl-sb1246-farms-covers-up-illegal-farming-practices-endangering-public-safety#?opt_new=f&opt_fb=t
--
www.change.org/petitions/fl-sb1246-farms-covers-up-illegal-farming-practices-endangering-public-safety#?opt_new=f&opt_fb=t
 FL SB1246 - farms - covers up illegal farming practices endangering
public safety
Your Honor:
Florida SB 1246 (Farms) would make it a felony for anybody to photograph or video record illegal acts in farms thereby making it impossible to report to law enforcement. This bill means, literally,
"Protecting farmers so they may use downer cows and illegal or banned chemicals". Also protects acts of animal cruelty, even using gestation crates which has been banned by our Florida

Constitution. As long as these farmers sell to the public WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW if they are
poisoning us or not, or feeding us downer cows.

Please protect our us and our children-say NO to SB 1246 - farms.
Without photos or videos, there would be no evidence, and the sky is the limit what farmers can do with unethical, dangerous, and illegal practices.
Thank you for your time and reading.
Sincerely,

 

===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

 
Mississippi:
Please forward to anyone in Mississippi:
The Mississippi State Senate recently approved legislation that would expand the state's anti-cruelty law to make intentionally harming a cat or dog a felony crime-and the bill is now on its way to the state's House of Representatives.
http://capwiz.com/alleycat/issues/alert/?alertid=14682801&PROCESS=Take+Action&external_id=10519.0

 

 
Missouri:

Subject: EWA/ALC Alert | Missouri Legislation HB

MO HB 1747 passed the house. We must stop this in the Senate. There is a link in the below article from Laura Allen to the bill text but it basically allows horse slaughter and moves all regulation to the state level. While all meat must be federally inspected (there is currently no funding which prohibits horses from being slaughtered on US soil) it will not bode well for our federal legislation if this passes.

I have heard from several people that have called that they are pulling the ol’ you don’t reside in MO so it’s none of your business. If you get that, tell them if they are going to be slaughtering horses from other states, they have made it your business and they must listen to every horse owner in the US. Horses crossing state lines to go to slaughter makes it a federal issue, not a state issue.

We encourage you to fax a letter. We are hearing that email is being ignored. I clicked through the list of senators and snagged each of their fax numbers so you don’t have to look them up – file is attached. If you would rather email, below Laura’s article is a list of email addresses (thanks, Jenny!) that were available. For the others, you can click the name on the attached file and it will let you email from the site. You can also go to this link and go one-by-one to send an email. You can copy and paste the same message and just keep going down the list. Be sure to change the senator’s name in your message!  http://www.senate.mo.gov/webmail/mail_form.aspx

http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1160

MO House Passes Scary Bill

Posted Jan 24, 2010 by lauraallen

o    Horse Slaughter

Update April 1: H.B. 1747 has passed the Missouri House of Representatives.  This bill now moves to the state senate.

The version passed by the House is basically the same as the introduced bill, except for one significant change: If this bill becomes law, "[n]o law criminalizing or otherwise regulating crops or the welfare of any domesticated animals shall be valid unless based upon generally accepted scientific principles and enacted by the general assembly." 

Scary language for animals.

This means there could be no local laws regarding the welfare of any domesticated animal including dogs, cats, horses, other pets and farm animals that differ from state laws. Also, any current animal cruelty or animal welfare law in Missouri would be void unless it was "based upon generally accepted scientific principles and enacted by the general assembly." People charged with animal abuse could raise challenges to the law, claiming it was not based upon "generally accepted scientific principles". Possibly, all laws governing animal cruelty or welfare would simply be void because there was no determination of whether they were based upon "generally accepted scientific principles". Arguably, current regulations governing animal welfare and protection would be void as well for this lack of this determination and also because they are not enacted by the legislature; regulations are issued by state agencies.  

But that is not all this bill does. It was originally introduced to promote horse slaughter and it still does that. Read Animal Law Coalition's report below for more on this bill and what else all of us must do to stop it. 

Missouri state Rep. James Viebrock is the sponsor of H.B. 1747, which basically would also authorize registration and inspections for commercial horse slaughter for human consumption.

The bill proposes that the Missouri Dept. of Agriculture would register commercial horse slaughter operations and certify "that the parts of horses to be processed are fit for human food, and the processing establishment to be operated complies with ... sanitary standards". All registration and inspection fees collected" would "be paid to the director of agriculture and deposited into the state ‘Horse Meat and Product Fund'". Annual inspection fees would be used "to pay for USDA inspection of horse meat products and horse meat processing facilities."

According to the bill, H.B. 1747, "the [state] director [of Agriculture] shall make all necessary inspections and investigations" and the USDA would also have access "at all reasonable times to any building, room, vehicle, boat, or other premises in which any horse carcass, horse meat, or horse meat food product is processed, packed, transported, sold, exposed, or offered for sale at retail."

The USDA would be free to pay for samples or specimens of the carcass or "product" to determine if there are violations of USDA regulations.  

The new law would have requirements for labeling, remedies to protect against adulteration, misbranding, failure to label or brand, or unfitness for human consumption. Places that serve horsemeat would be required to post conspicuous warning signs.

The proposal, of course, is simply another tactic to promote horse slaughter with the hope of forcing a return of horse slaughter to this country.  This bill is similar to a number of bills and resolutions introduced in 2009 and several more this year, 2010, also offered in an effort to defeat the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress and which would make it illegal to "possess..., ship..., transport..., purchase.., sell... deliver..., or receive" in interstate or foreign commerce any horse "with the intent that it is to be slaughtered for human consumption".   The latest of these bills to pass as part of the pro-slaughter disinformation campaign is a Wyoming law that sadly promotes sending horses to slaughter but not to rescues or sanctuaries.

Right now, commercial horse slaughter for human consumption is illegal in the U.S. though horses can be transported to other countries, typically Mexico and  Canada, for slaughter. Since 2006 Congress has de-funded ante-mortem inspections required to slaughter horses for human consumption. Congress continued the de-funding in the 2010 Appropriations Act, Sec. 744.

In 2007 a federal court rejected an attempt by the USDA to allow horse slaughter operators to pay for the inspections. The USDA is currently not authorized to conduct ante-mortem inspections of horses to be slaughtered for human consumption. Without those inspections, it is illegal under the Federal Meat Inspection Act ("FMIA"), 21 U.S.C. §§601(w)(1), 603, to slaughter horses for human consumption.

If this bill becomes law, it is not clear the USDA would authorize Missouri state inspectors to conduct the required inspections.  The funds to pay for the state as well as USDA inspections would come from horse slaughter operators, the same situation in the previous litigation. The judge in that case found the USDA  violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706 and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. § 4321, et seq., by failing to consider adequately, or, really, at all, the environmental impact of its action in allowing horse slaughter operators to pay for their own inspections.   

Also, there is strong opposition to horse slaughter in the U.S., and the goal is to pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, to end this brutal practice altogether for all American horses.  A similar bill passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming majority in 2006, a vote of 263 to 146, but was never voted on in the Senate.

In 2007 a law in Texas, Texas Agriculture Code §§ 149.001-.007  was found to ban horse slaughter for human consumption and was upheld by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. A ban in Illinois, 225 ILCS 635, on horse slaughter for human consumption was upheld in 2008 by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. These state laws and court rulings closed the 3 facilities that were still slaughtering horses in the U.S.; those facilities were located in Texas and Illinois.  (Go here to read about and help oppose state Rep. Jim Sacia's effort once again to overturn the Illinois ban on horse slaughter for human consumption; the Iliinois legislature and Illinois voters have never supported this effort. )

Horse slaughter is also illegal in California, CA Penal Code § 598c ("unlawful for any person to possess, to import into or export from the state, or to sell, buy, give away, hold, or accept any horse with the intent of killing, or having another kill, that horse, if that person knows or should have known that any part of that horse will be used for human consumption"). A Mississippi law, MS Code §75-33-3, states that the "term ‘food unfit for human consumption' shall be construed to include meat and meat-food products of horses and mules.". In Oklahoma, 63 Okla. Stat. §1-1136, it is "unlawful for any person to sell, offer or exhibit for sale . . . any quantity of horsemeat for human consumption."

In 2009 the Rhode Island House of Representatives issued a resolution in support of a federal ban on commercial horse slaughter for human consumption.  A similar resolution is pending in California. A bill is pending in New York to ban commercial horse slaughter or trade in horse meat for human consumption.  Wisconsin, Senate Bill 142 would also ban horse slaughter. 

WHAT YOU CAN DO

If you live in Missouri, again, find your state senator here.  If you don't live in Missouri, well, this bill affects horses in your state, so find Missouri state senators here. Everyone, write (letters or faxes are best) or call and urge these representatives to vote no to H.B. 1747. Please be polite.  Tell them horse slaughter is a seedy business that is cruel and inhumane; there is no way to make horse slaughter profitable and also humane. Americans don't consume horsemeat, and these facilities are generally owned by foreign investors that ship the horsemeat products overseas where they are consumed as delicacies in expensive restaurants. The profits go overseas as well. Local governments can't even collect sales taxes from them. They pay no export taxes which means the U.S. government basically subsidizes the sale of horsemeat to foreign comsumers for whom it is an expensive delicacy. There is no benefit to any community from a horse slaughter facility. Go here to read about the experience of the mayor of Kaufman, Texas when a horse slaughter facility operated there. There was no economic benefit, only financial hardship, pollution,  clogged sewer lines, illegally dumped waste and discharges in excess of that allowed by wastewater permitsand a town plagued by horrific smells and blood and waste in the streets.   

Go here to read how you can help pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress.

Frank.Barnitz@senate.mo.gov

jbray@senate.mo.gov
dan_clemens@senate.mo.gov
Jane.Cunningham@senate.mo.gov
tom.dempsey@senate.mo.gov
timothy_green@senate.mo.gov
Rob.Mayer@senate.mo.gov
chuck.purgason@senate.mo.gov

eschmitt@senate.mo.gov
charlie_shields@senate.mo.gov

Wes.Shoemyer@senate.mo.gov

bstouffer@senate.mo.gov
Yvonne.Wilson@senate.mo.gov

webmail to reach them all: http://www.senate.mo.gov/webmail/mail_form.aspx 

Vicki | A Voice for Our Horses

 

(Note from Brandi:  I don’t have room on the list to post the whole article, but the link will take you to it and I believe the letter is also on that link.)
From: Vicki Tobin

Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 1:59 PM

To: Vicki Tobin

Subject: MO Bill passes committee.

Here’s info from Laura. Please also scroll below this to a letter I found through a google alert from an atty in MO.

A MO bill to allow state inspectors for horse slaughter just passed a committee and with a substitute version that would basically void all current animal welfare laws. (Read the very last line of the substitute version of the bill.) My sources in MO tell me Viebrock has the votes to pass this. No one opposed it during the committee hearing. We have to get on this!   http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1160

 

Fw: Missouri bill introduced and great rebuttal to Salazar Editorial

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Mon Jan 25, 2010 4:39 am (PST)
----- Original Message -----
From: vicki tobin
To: vicki tobin
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 10:01 PM
Subject: Missouri bill introduced and great rebuttal to Salazar Editorial
This is from Laura Allen at Animal Law Coalition. We suspect we'll start seeing quite a few of these from the anti-horse states. http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1160 HB 1747 introduced by MO state Rep. Viebrock that would authorize the state of MO to pay for USDA inspections and otherwise allow the state dept of ag to register, certify and regulate horse slaughter facilities.
Show MO Legislators Why They Should Oppose H.B. 1747
Posted Jan 24, 2010 by lauraallen
o Horse Slaughter
Missouri state Rep. James Viebrock has introduced a bill, H.B. 1747, that would authorize registration and inspections for commercial horse slaughter for human consumption.
The bill proposes that the Missouri Dept. of Agriculture would register commercial horse slaughter operations and certify "that the parts of horses to be processed are fit for human food, and the processing establishment to be operated complies with ... sanitary standards". All registration and inspection fees collected" would "be paid to the director of agriculture and deposited into the state 'Horse Meat and Product Fund'". Annual inspection fees would be used "to pay for USDA inspection of horse meat products and horse meat processing facilities."
According to the bill, H.B. 1747, "the [state] director [of Agriculture] shall make all necessary inspections and investigations" and the USDA would also have access "at all reasonable times to any building, room, vehicle, boat, or other premises in which any horse carcass, horse meat, or horse meat food product is processed, packed, transported, sold, exposed, or offered for sale at retail."
The USDA would be free to pay for samples or specimens of the carcass or "product" to determine if there are violations of USDA regulations.
The new law would have requirements for labeling, remedies to protect against adulteration, misbranding, failure to label or brand, or unfitness for human consumption. Places that serve horsemeat would be required to post conspicuous warning signs.
The proposal, of course, is simply another tactic to try to create a market in the U.S. for horse meat or at least pretend there is one with the hope of forcing a return of horse slaughter to this country. This bill is similar to a number of bills and resolutions introduced in 2009 in an effort to defeat the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress and which would make it illegal to "possess..., ship..., transport..., purchase.., sell... deliver..., or receive" in interstate or foreign commerce any horse "with the intent that it is to be slaughtered for human consumption".
Right now, commercial horse slaughter for human consumption is illegal in the U.S. though horses can be transported to other countries, typically Mexico and Canada, for slaughter. Since 2006 Congress has de-funded ante-mortem inspections required to slaughter horses for human consumption. Congress continued the de-funding in the 2010 Appropriations Act, Sec. 744.
In 2007 a federal court rejected an attempt by the USDA to allow horse slaughter operators to pay for the inspections. The USDA is currently not authorized to conduct ante-mortem inspections of horses to be slaughtered for human consumption. Without those inspections, it is illegal under the Federal Meat Inspection Act ("FMIA"), 21 U.S.C. §§601(w)(1), 603, to slaughter horses for human consumption.
If this bill becomes law, it is not clear the USDA would authorize Missouri state inspectors to conduct the required inspections. The funds to pay for the state as well as USDA inspections would come from horse slaughter operators, the same situation in the previous litigation. The judge in that case found the USDA violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706 and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. § 4321, et seq., by failing to consider adequately, or, really, at all, the environmental impact of its action in allowing horse slaughter operators to pay for their own inspections.
Also, there is strong opposition to horse slaughter in the U.S., and the goal is to pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, to end this brutal practice altogether for all American horses. A similar bill passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming majority in 2006, a vote of 263 to 146, but was never voted on in the Senate.
In 2007 a law in Texas, Texas Agriculture Code §§ 149.001-.007 was found to ban horse slaughter for human consumption and was upheld by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. A ban in Illinois, 225 ILCS 635, on horse slaughter for human consumption was upheld in 2008 by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. These state laws and court rulings closed the 3 facilities that were still slaughtering horses in the U.S.; those facilities were located in Texas and Illinois. (Go here to read about and help oppose state Rep. Jim Sacia's effort once again to overturn the Illinois ban on horse slaughter for human consumption; the Iliinois legislature and Illinois voters have never supported this effort. )
Horse slaughter is also illegal in California, CA Penal Code § 598c ("unlawful for any person to possess, to import into or export from the state, or to sell, buy, give away, hold, or accept any horse with the intent of killing, or having another kill, that horse, if that person knows or should have known that any part of that horse will be used for human consumption"). A Mississippi law, MS Code §75-33-3, states that the "term 'food unfit for human consumption' shall be construed to include meat and meat-food products of horses and mules.". In Oklahoma, 63 Okla. Stat. §1-1136, it is "unlawful for any person to sell, offer or exhibit for sale . . . any quantity of horsemeat for human consumption."
In 2009 the Rhode Island House of Representatives issued a resolution in support of a federal ban on commercial horse slaughter for human consumption. A bill is pending in New York to ban commercial horse slaughter or trade in horse meat for human consumption. A similar bill remains is pending in Wisconsin, S.B. 142.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
If you live in Missouri, find your state representative here. If you don't live in Missouri, well, this bill affects horses in your state, so find Missouri representatives here. Everyone, write (letters or faxes are best) or call and urge these representatives to vote no to H.B. 1747. Please be polite. Tell them horse slaughter is a seedy business that is cruel and inhumane; there is no way to make horse slaughter profitable and also humane. Americans don't consume horsemeat, and these facilities are generally owned by foreign investors that ship the horsemeat products overseas where they are consumed as delicacies in expensive restaurants. The profits go overseas as well...Local governments can't even collect sales taxes from them. There is no benefit to any community from a horse slaughter facility. Go here to read about the experience of the mayor of Kaufman, Texas when a horse slaughter facility operated there. There was no economic benefit, only financial hardship, pollution, and a town plagued by horrific smells and blood and waste in the streets.
Go here to read how you can help pass the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act, H.R. 503/S.B. 727, now pending in Congress.

Vicki | A Voice for Our Horses

 

===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

 
Montana:

Montana Slaughter Law Could Face Challenges

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu May 7, 2009 2:40 pm (PDT)
Montana Slaughter Law Could Face Challenges
by: Pat Raia
May 06 2009, Article # 14112
A new Montana state law invites private investors to develop horse slaughter facilities in that state. But opponents say compliance and court challenges might discourage prospective investors from ever breaking ground on plant projects.
HB 418 insulates plant developers from permit and licensing challenges on environmental and other grounds, and awards attorney and court fees to plaintiffs in cases District Courts deem harassing or without merit. It automatically became law last Friday after Gov. Brian Schweitzer declined to sign or veto it 10 days after it reached his desk (read more).
Nancy Perry, vice president of Government Affairs for the Humane Society of the United States, said the legislation could be challenged because it removes Montana citizens' right to to sue plant developers in state courts.
There are also some concerns with food safety compliance issues. All meat processing plants in the United States are subject to USDA regulation and product inspection, said Amanda Eamich, spokesperson for the agency's Food Inspection Service. But congress previously stripped the USDA's funding for horse processing plant inspections.
"U.S. law prohibits the funding of inspectors for the regulation of horse slaughter," Eamich said. "Without the federal inspections, they couldn't get the meat out of state or out of the country."
HB 418 sponsor Rep. Ed Butcher argued that since meat processed in Montana would be destined for European markets, plant owners could employ European Union personnel to regulate the plants and conduct product inspections.
"Then inspection challenges would go to the world trade court," Butcher explained.
He also disagrees that the law is unconstitutional.
"Courts have the right to offer an opinion about legislation--they do not have the right to make law. That's the legislature's job," he said.

 

Montana 1 Last Chance

Posted by: "Beth (:" fatoldfarmwife@verizon.net   bethofneer

Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:25 pm (PDT)
From: Lucille Matte
Date: 4/20/2009 11:32:00 AM
To: mortgagematte@earthlink.net
Subject: Montana 1 Last Chance
Cross-post and send out to your email lists. Please!!!
Please take a minute to contact the governor of Montana and ask him to VETO
HB 418. This is VERY important and will only take a minute : ) Thanks!!!
A simple message is all that is needed: VETO House Bill 418.
Period.
No embellishments are necessary.
The sooner the better.
Contact: Governor Brian Schweitzer
Phone: 406-444-3111
e-mail: governor@mt.gov

Lucille Matte
Mortgages Direct
2000 Bering Drive, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77057
(713)860-1218 office
(713)459-9202 cell
Please call for fax number.
Please visit my website www.mortgagematte.com
"A Horse that is slaughtered has NO chance of being rescued, a Horse in a
field does."
Please help stop horse slaughter in the U.S.A.
https://community.hsus.org/campaign/FED_2007_horse_slaughter
www.everyfiveminutes.org

 

===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

FRIENDS -PLEASE TAKE 10 MINUTES OUT OF YOUR DAY AND MAKE THIS PHONE
CALL.REMEMBER WE ARE THE ONLY VOICE OUR HORSES HAVE.WE NEED TO PUSH THIS
THANKS!!!!
 ----- Original Message -----
 From: "Americans Against Horse Slaughter" <aahsus@gmail.com>
 To: <cdemao@parallax.ws>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 3:21 PM
Subject: URGENT HELP NEEDED FOR MONTANA TODAY!
 URGENT HELP NEEDED FOR MONTANA TODAY!!!
HR 418, a bill which allows private horse-slaughtering plants to be
built in Montana and offers them some protections from those who might
challenge a plant's license passed through a Senate committee in Montana
 by a vote of 7-2 on Tuesday
The measure's next stop is most likely scheduled for Thursday March 19
where the full Senate will debate and vote on HR 418. If the Senate
approves and doesn't amend HR418, it will go to Democratic Gov. Brian
 Schweitzer for his signature into law.
 NOW is the time to flood those phone lines with calls from all over the
 nation asking the MT Senate to vote NO on HR 418
Messages can be left at (406) 444-4800.for the following Senators that
we are targeting: You can also fax to 406-444-4875

Senator Jackson SD 5
Sen Roy Brown SD 25
Sen Jim Shockley SD 45
Joe Balyeat SD 34
Sen Essman SD 28
Sen Laible SD 44
Sen Lewis SD 42
Sen Perry SD 35
Thanks for all that you do to help the horses,
Amercians Against Horse Slaughter
This message was sent by: Americans Against Horse Slaughter, 1551 Willow
Pond Dr., Yardley, PA 19067

Update:

Montana Bad News for the Horses !!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: "Paula Gehl" RGehl@worldpath.net   paulagehl

Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:24 pm (PDT)

The slaughter house bill passed today in Montana: 27 to 23. One of the Senators emailed me back today and told me. Said he is disgusted!!!!!
And so am I.
God help the horses.

 

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm (PDT)

Update on State Slaughter Resolutions; Idaho Joins Debate
by: Pat Raia
March 12 2009, Article # 13765
Print Email NEW! Add to Favorites RSS ShareThis
Idaho has joined the list of states pondering legislation aimed at maintaining control of equine transport and re-establishing the horse processing industry in the United States.
Introduced into Idaho's House State Affairs Committee this week by State Rep. Thomas F. Loertscher, HJM 005 instructs Idaho's congressional delegation to vote against the Conyers-Burton Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act (HR 503). The federal measure would impose a nationwide ban on the transport of horses for slaughter.
Resolutions similar to Idaho's have passed in:
a.. Kansas (HCR 5004)
b.. South Dakota (SCR 2)
c.. Utah (HJR 7)
d.. Wyoming (HJR 8)
Similar resolutions are pending in:
a.. Arizona (SCM 1001)
b.. Minnesota (SF 133)
c.. North Dakota (HB 1496)
d.. Arkansas (HCR 1004)
e.. Missouri (House, HCR 19; Senate, SCR 8)
Meanwhile, legislators in the following states are considering bills that would amend current state laws to promote the development of horse slaughter plants by private investors:
a.. Illinois (HB 0583)
b.. Montana (HB 418)
c.. Tennessee (HB 1361)
Read more about these bills.
The bills are the first to establish horse processing facilities in the United States since 2007, when lawmakers in Texas and in Illinois shuttered slaughter plants in those states. Horses are currently shipped to facilities in Mexico and Canada for processing for markets in Europe and Asia.
Keep an eye on TheHorse.com for updates as this situation develops.
Click here to contact your Senator. Click here to contact your Representative.

 

Montana horse slaughterhouse bill moves forward

Related Content

Habitat for Horses

The North American Meat Processors Association

By MATT GOURAS

Associated Press Writer

HELENA, Mont. -- The Montana House of Representatives strongly endorsed a bill that paves the way for construction of a horse slaughterhouse in Montana and aims to bring the industry back to the United States.

Backers said ranchers and those who own horses have been struggling ever since all the slaughterhouses in the country were closed down. They said it is far more difficult now to dispose of old, sick or injured animals.

"This bill is really providing a humane and regulated processing plant," said the sponsor, Republican Rep. Ed Butcher, a horse owner from the central Montana farm community of Winifred. "Demand is there. We want a humane way to address the problem."

The measure was endorsed 67-33 Tuesday in the first of two scheduled House votes. If it passes again Wednesday as expected, it will go to the Senate for more hearings and votes.

Butcher said his bill gives investors assurance that Montana will treat their businesses fairly if they build in the state.

He was backed by agriculture interests on both sides of the aisle. House Majority Leader Margarett Campbell, D-Poplar, said the closure of the country's last slaughterhouse "had a devastating effect on ranchers."

Others said that old and lame horses are being abandoned on public land in some cases.

Cavel International Inc. Shut down its DeKalb, Ill., operation after the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2007 upheld an Illinois law prohibiting slaughter of horses for human consumption.

Opponents argued that a horse slaughterhouse should not be granted special exemptions from environmental and other laws, and should be treated like any factory.

Rep. Sue Malek, D-Missoula, said animals should be more justly treated. "We need to care about animals and be responsible owners," she said.

In 2007, when state-imposed bans closed the last three U.S. Horse slaughterhouses, a record 78,000 horses were exported to Canada and Mexico for slaughter, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics compiled by the Humane Society.

Butcher argued the country needs a slaughterhouse as cases of horse abandonment and cruelty escalate amid economic upheaval that has some owners of the animals unable to care for them, unable to find new homes for horses and looking for ways to dispose of them humanely and affordably.

Selling horses for slaughter was an option when the country had facilities to take them, Butcher said, but now people are left with the cost of euthanasia plus disposal fees that can run into hundreds of dollars.

Butcher said slaughtering domestically makes more sense than sending U.S. Horses to Canada or Mexico, and the work can be done swiftly, without pain to the animal.

But Nancy Perry, the Humane Society's vice president for government affairs, has said horses are particularly ill-suited for traditional slaughterhouses. The animals are likely to try to escape the kill box and the procedure for killing them can be disrupted.

Update:

MT House passes horse slaughter bill

Posted by: "sunnybroad@aol.com" sunnybroad@aol.com   tlw9906

Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:08 pm (PDT)
MT House passes horse slaughter bill
Posted: March 12, 2009 07:13 PM CDT
Updated: March 12, 2009 07:20 PM CDT
Reporting for KRTV in Great Falls
Also on the Web
2009 MT Legislature
A bill to authorize investor-owned livestock slaughter and processing plants in the state has passed through the Montana House of Representatives.
What's become known as the "Horse Slaughter bill" was heard in front of the Senate Agriculture, Livestock, and Irrigation committee.
Bill sponsor Ed Butcher (R-Winifred) says House Bill 418 relates to livestock, not pets, and is a "safe business environment" bill that could bring millions of dollars in revenue to the Montana.
Butcher estimates there are 150,000 excess horses in the country per year and this would provide a humane means of disposal.
Butcher explained, "This is probably one of the most important bills, not only for the state of Montana but also for the nation, that is going to come before the body this year. I think it's very timely, those of us that receive the phone calls and e-mails and whatever recognize that this is a serious problem in horse country."
Opponents at today's hearing?argue that?slaughter houses create environmental problems, and the stigma that they bring can hinder business development by repelling investors.
WEB EXTRA: click here to read the full text of HB 418.
?
Terri
WWW.HORSEREUNIONS.COM
find your dream horse.... again!

 

 
Nebraska:

[againstslaughter] Slaughtering Horses: Nebraska Lawmaker Believes I

Posted by: "Kitrynak@aol.com" Kitrynak@aol.com   kitrynak

Tue Mar 1, 2011 2:37 pm (PST)
http://nebraska.statepaper.com/vnews/display.v/ART/4d6c851a1a2b3
Slaughtering Horses: Nebraska Lawmaker Believes It's Legal
March 01, 2011
There are indications some sort of showdown might be looming between the  federal government and lawmakers who want to reopen horse meat  processing operations in Nebraska.
U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesperson Neil Gaffney was unambiguous in shooting down the notion.
"There is no possibility under the current law for a state-inspected meat plant to ship any meat, interstate or internationally, for human consumption," Gaffney told the LJS.
Sen. Ty Larson of O’Neill, a member of the Legislature’s Agriculture Committee, thinks Gaffney is wrong. He is chief sponsor of a bill (LB305) intended to allow the processing of horse meat. He believes states have authority to inspect such slaughterhouses. The bill is pending before the full Legislature but has not been scheduled for debate.
The dispute involves whether a horse slaughtering operation could function without federal inspections of how the animals are killed; those inspections are no longer provided by the USDA. In 2007 the nation’s last three horse processing plants in America were closed.
Meanwhile, Larson told the North Platte Telegraph that several communities have expressed interest in hosting a horse meat plant. And he said North Platte is well-located because it is on Interstate 80, U.S. Highway 30 and rail transportation.
“It is one of the logical choices because of its location,” Larson told the Telegraph. “But, it’s up to the community leaders and investors. I’m not going to say North Platte needs to have a plant. There are other places around the state that have expressed interest.”
North Platte was once home to a horse slaughtering plant.
A group of breeders and ranchers from around the country met in Las Vegas in January to discuss the possibility of getting Congress to repeal the four-year-old law that banned killing horses for human consumption. That is the law which Larson is questioning.
The resumption of the slaughter of horses for food has been a major issue for animal rights activists who point to the industry’s previous history of mistreating animals in brutal and miserable conditions. Supporters of re-establishing horse slaughterhouses say the plants can be operated humanely, and that untolled numbers of horses, wild and domestic, currently starve for want of care.
If a horse processing operation prepares to open in Nebraska or some other state, conflict with the USDA apparently would be inevitable. It would have to be settled through the administrative process or, failing that, in court.
Currently, hundreds of horses are regularly shipped to Mexico where they are butchered for food and exported.

 

 
Nevada:

Fw: 2011.03.22 Nevada Horse Tripping update

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:27 pm (PDT)

Today's News
The bill number for the horse tripping legislation is SB 364. We are in touch with several local advocates and organizations and will be providing more information as it is received.
Here is the text of the legislation: http://www.equinewelfarealliance.org/uploads/SB_364_NV_Horse_Tripping.pdf
Thanks to Carrol Abel for sending us the bill number and text.
Template design and image copyright Terry Fitch
Logo copyright Lissa Brooks & Joan Dillon
Forward email
This email was sent to by vicki@equinewelfareal liance.org |
| Privacy Policy.
Equine Welfare Alliance | 732 Benedetti Drive | Naperville | IL | 60563

More info:

Ban Horse Tripping in Nevada

http://rtfitch.wordpress.com/2011/04/05/ban-horse-tripping-in-nevada/

Update:

Fw: 2011.04.14 Action Alert: Nevada Horse Tripping

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:18 am (PDT)

Action Alert: Horse Tripping Bill SB364
I received a note from Willis this morning indicating our opponents have gone into full swing with a disinformation campaign to legislators in NV on horse tripping. They are using the slippery slope, i.e. it is the first step to banning rodeos. Please take a moment today to contact the committee to ensure this bill passes. They will vote tomorrow.
Our opponents are taking their disinformation campaign state to state. Equines are being attacked from all fronts - whether it's slaughter, wild horses or horse tripping. We need to send OUR message, present the facts and let them know that by not passing SB364, they are condoning the cruelty of horse tripping.
I'm resending the original message below with information on how to help so you don't have to dig through your emails.
Original Message:
The first reading of the horse tripping was held yesterday and went well. Several of our advocates have been working hard and I want to send a special thanks to Willis Lamm, Eric Mills, Carrol Abel, Beverly McGrath and especially to ASPCA for sponsoring the bill. My apologies if I missed anyone but I don't have the names of everyone that has been working this. Our opponents are still trying to pull the HSUS rhetoric and did so at the meeting and were corrected. No doubt, they'll continue to say HSUS is behind this and out to ban rodeos.
Willis sent a spectacular email to coxtv.com correcting an inaccurate AP story that someone must have fed to them. He has given me permission to share it with you. Below his email is information on what you can do to help to ensure passage of this legislation and notes from the meeting.
I usually don't quarrel with news stories however a story that appears on your site, Animal Activists Going After Rodeo Horse Events, is grossly incorrect. The one true fact in the story is that the Legislature is considering a state wide ban on horse tripping. However the charrerias (Mexican rodeos) outlawed horse tripping in the US many years ago. In researching this issue for the Animal Services Advisory Board, Mr. Ramiro Rodriguez , President of the ACA, wrote me, "The charros in the US do not trip the horses when they do manganas in any competition, whoever trips a horse (intentionally) is suspended for a whole year."
Horse tripping is not a recognized event in any form of sanctioned rodeo. It is a shadow sport similar to dog fighting. So the issue has absolutely no relationship to rodeos.
Two counties, Clark and Lyon, currently have bans on horse tripping and Washoe has such an ordinance under consideration. The Lyon County ordinance was passed in 2008 after the Sheriff's Dept. raised concerns about some incidents that took place. After passage the world didn't end and legitimate charrerias were not affected whatsoever.
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with rodeos nor is it some back door attempt to attack rodeo and livestock events. I'm one of the first to tout Nevada's safety record when it comes to sanctioned rodeos and livestock events, but I certainly testified in favor of this bill.
My grave concern about this story, and it is grave, is that it discredits everyone involved. The advocates, humane organizations and governmental entities involved are characterized as "animal rights activists" who appear to want to shut down rodeo activities. The bill was actually advanced by the ASPCA with support of humane associations and animal services agencies. The story's characterizations make our legitimate rodeos look bad which is unfortunate since our rodeo associations take safety of animals and participants very seriously.
Finally, and worst of all, the story suggests that the Mexican charrerias in the United States conduct horse tripping events, something that only fuels prejudice and ethnic mistrust based on a completely false premise. So let's have a new reason for people to hate a specific ethnic segment of our population.
I realize your site merely presented an AP story. However it is my belief that aside from its inaccuracies it is unreasonably harmful to all the parties involved in the story. It consists of sensation, not accurate news. I formally request that you remove the present story and replace it with a locally produced story that is accurate, and that you forward my concerns to AP. A good start would be by contacting Senator Allison Copening, the bill's sponsor, or Committee Chair Mark Manendo.
There are just so many ways that this story can create trouble. If it were accurate then the chips should fall where they may. Given that it is not accurate, a retraction or corrected tag story should be issued.
Respectfully submitted,
Willis Lamm, Vice Chair
Lyon County Animal Services Advisory Board
We encourage all of you to write to the committee in Nevada that will be hearing the bill, particularly Chairman Manendo (committee contact info is at the bottom of this email). Feel free to take comments from Willis' email or the below bullet points summarizing points from the meeting. We want to ensure this legislation passes into law and want to thank everyone that wrote letters for the first reading. They were mentioned at the meeting. As with all correspondence, it is preferred you use your own words so the letters don't appear to be form letters.
1. Nobody seems to be willing to say that they support horse tripping.
2. A ban on tripping will not impact any legitimate sanctioned events.
3. A state wide ban on tripping will help local agencies police horse events.
4. A ban on tripping will not affect any other rodeo or equine events.
5. A ban on tripping will not affect normal ranching, veterinary or training activities.
6. A ban on tripping will enhance Nevada's image with respect to the fact that the state strives to run reasonable safe equine and livestock events that would be appropriate for families of all ages to attend.
Here are Willis' notes from the meeting:
It was an interesting afternoon at the Senate Natural Resources Committee. The committee didn't get under way until 4:00 (members were at other meetings that were running late) but the first issue was SB364.
The pro SB364 speakers were organized and brought in relevant supporting documents. The Lyon County Animal Services Advisory Board was among the organizations and entities officially supporting the bill.
In contrast the anti SB364 speakers drifted all over the map citing all kinds of speculation, some of which the Committee Chair called them down on and made them admit that they had no data or documentation in which to back their claims. Someone from the Reno Rodeo Association presented a rambling theory about how banning horse tripping was the next step in banning rodeos. I personally thought that the Reno Rodeo Assn. was more savvy and "together" than that, and the Chairman summed things up by saying that this was a hearing on horse tripping, nothing more, and that nobody can predict what any future legislature is going to so so he's not going to worry about it.
Even some of the public present for other bills who didn't really care for a horse tripping ban were demonstrating body language supportive of the ban - rolling their eyes and looking across the room when someone presented a profoundly stupid argument against the bill.
The real show stopper was when one speaker argued that a horse tripping ban would lead to Texas taking away the National Finals Rodeo from Nevada. The Chair asked the speaker on what data the argument was based? The speaker had none. Then the Chair asked how Nevada's passing a horse tripping ban would affect the NFR. After the speaker stumbled around expressing some circuitous logic the Chair pointed out that Texas already had a horse tripping ban, so what's the difference? The speaker excused himself and sat down.
The charreria folks all explained that their associations had banned horse tripping years ago and so they opposed a law banning horse tripping. The ethnic card got played. The Chair asked, "don't you still have your events even though your own associations have banned horse tripping?" The answer, of course, had to be "yes." Finally the Chair had enough. He asked the standing room only crowd (including the video link from Las Vegas) for a show of hands. Who here today actually approves of horse tripping?
"Let the record show that nobody raised their hands, so it looks like we're all in agreement here."
The committee moved on to hear SB299.
One complaint expressed by an anti-SB364 speaker was that passing the bill could be perceived by folks that we have a problem here in Nevada and that would project a negative image. So after the hearing I made some calls and the responses I got was that they felt that SB364 actually shored up Nevada's image in that the state was serious about events involving animals that are profoundly dangerous. Some of them may contact the committee and indicate that this bill is a good thing as it reassures parents that equestrian and livestock events in Nevada should be appropriate places to go as families, avoiding the likelihood that young children would be exposed to a horrific activity.
I give Chairman Manendo high marks for liberally allowing public comment but bringing the issue back on focus when necessary.
This was just the first reading. Hopefully the bill will move forward without interference and the Assembly Committee hearing will be just as rational.
Mark Manendo, Chair - mmanendo@sen.state.nv.us
John Jay Lee - lee@sen.state.nv.us
David Parks - dparks@sen.state.nv.us
Michael Roberson - mroberson@sen.state.nv.us
Dean Rhoads - drhoads@sen.state.nv.us

Update:

Fw: 2011.04.20 Catching up on News | NV Horse Tripping

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:33 am (PDT)

NV Horse Tripping Update
Sorry for the delay in updating everyone but as you can imagine, we've been hopping with the conference.
Unfortunately, the bill did not make it out of committee on Friday. I listened to the live stream and we owe a huge thanks to Senator Manendo who gave a very compelling opening when bringing the bill back for one last effort. Even Lee, who opposed the bill said his words were the most convincing he's heard but said he had already committed. What was odd or perhaps a cover your you know what - was that he did not want the committee to take a vote so it wasn't killed. He also said if there is any evidence of horse tripping in the state, he would support the bill next session. So we have to wait until a horse is injured or killed before he'll support banning the practice.
The slippery slope argument is so lame but Lee and Roberson bought it and Rhoads, of course, wouldn't support it no matter what was presented. Texas is a perfect example. One of the largest, if not the largest, rodeo states banned horse tripping and there has been zero impact. We hear from good sources that Rhoads, the cattlemen associations and farm bureau [once again] were also a driving force behind the opposition. It is mind boggling how they oppose every piece of legislation that is for animal welfare.
Below is a note from Eric Mills as well as the letter he sent. In addition, you may want to write other NV officials. I've heard from a few people already that said they would not be vacationing in NV this year because they are not going to give their hard earned money to a state that condones equine cruelty. As with all correspondence, please be polite and stay focused on the facts. You have a much better chance of being heard and taken seriously.
- - - - - - - - -
Greetings, all -
I sent the below Letter to the Editor to a bunch of Nevada newspapers. I'm hoping each of you will do something similar. AND A SUGGESTION - You might want to throw in a couple of lines about the opposition to the bill by the Reno Rodeo Association, and how this will NOT help them sell rodeo tickets. Indeed, it implies that the Reno Rodeo condones horse tripping.
I'm including the email addresses for a number of papers, just to make it easy on you.
EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR NEVADA NEWSPAPERS - Most have a 250 word limit.
--

RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL - letters@rgj.com
LAS VEGAS SUN - letters@vegas.com
LAS VEGAS REVIEW JOURNAL - letters@reviewjournal.com
CARSON CITY NEVADA APPEAL - editor@nevadaappeal.com
ELKO DAILY FREE PRESS - editor@elkodaily.com
ELY DAILY TIMES - editor@elynews.com
GARDNERVILLE RECORD-COURIER - letters@record-courier.com (500 words, max)
PAHRUMP VALLEY TIMES - walkingman64@excite.com
WINNEMUCCA HUMBOLDT SUN - editorial@humboldtsun.com
Subject: The Death of SB 364 (Copening) - to ban horse tripping
April 16, 2011
Letter to the Editor
A BETRAYAL OF HORSES
A sad for horses, the people of Nevada, and the democratic process.
On April 15, the Senate Natural Resources Committee let die SB 364 (Copening), without even taking a vote. The bill would have outlawed the brutal practice of "horse tripping," a standard event of the Mexican-style rodeo called "charreada." Only Senators Mark Manendo and David Parks supported the bill. Senators Dean Rhoads, Michael Roberson and John Lee opposed it, despite overwhelming evidence of the need for the measure.
Charreada features nine events, three of which involve the roping of running horses by the legs, either front ("manganas"), or rear ("piales"). Can you spell "insanity?" This is not a standard ranching practice anywhere in the U.S., nor is it sanctioned by any American-style rodeo association. Horse tripping is already banned in eight states: California, Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arizona, Nebraska, Illinois, Maine and Florida.
Reportedly, Senator Rhoads and the rodeo/ranching community, in their paranoia, lobbied heavily to kill this bill, claiming it was a first step toward outlawing all of rodeo. Nonsense! All the horse pucky is obviously not in the arena. The bill had NOTHING to do with sanctioned rodeo events.
Some media coverage might have made the difference. Maybe next session. Meanwhile, there's to be a charreada in Winnemucca on April 30-May 1 (#50 Winnemucca Blvd., 11 a.m.) Check it out. And take a legislator with you.
Sincerely,
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
P.O. Box 20184
Oakland, CA 94620
tel. 510/652-5603
News
Kudos to Maine for introducing legislation to ban horse slaughter for human consumption.
http://www.animallawcoalition.com/horse-slaughter/article/1722
A must read! Please scroll to the comments from Ann Marini on this Horseback Article. Just Brilliant.
http://horsebackmagazine.com/hb/archives/8057
EWA News
John Holland will be hosting a panel on horse slaughter at the upcoming June Anti-Fur Society conference in Washington, DC. You can read about the conference here http://www.afsconference.org/. We also want to welcome AFS as a new member to EWA.
Speaking of new members, EWA has added a new flag to our home page. Welcome Sofia, our newest member from Sweden!
Now that we have reached the number of "likes" required for a dedicated address for the conference on facebook, here it is www.facebook.com/InternationalEquineConference. I believe the temporary URL will also direct you there.

 

 
New Hampshire:

NH may charge $25 per horse

Posted by: "Marge" redmm97@cox.net   redmm97

Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:26 pm (PST)
You notice they always hold these meetings during the week while people who would protest are working.
I will foward to the group. Thanks for sending.
Marge
HB 427 would require all owners of equines older than 4 months to annually license their animals with the town/city clerk for $25 upon proof that the animal had been vaccinated for rabies. The hearing is set for Tuesday, January 27th at 1:45 pm before the House Local and Regulated Revenues Committee in Room 303 of the Legislative Office Building
HB 427-FN-A-LOCAL AS INTRODUCED
2009 SESSION
09-0777
08/10
HOUSE BILL 427-FN-A-LOCAL
AN ACT relative to equine licenses.
SPONSORS: Rep. Skinder, Sull 1; Rep. Spaulding, Hills 18; Rep. Parkhurst, Ches 4; Sen. Roberge, Dist 9; Sen. Cilley, Dist 6
COMMITTEE: Local and Regulated Revenues
ANALYSIS
This bill requires municipalities to license all equine animals.
This bill also establishes a state veterinarian s fund.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
09-0777
08/10
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine
AN ACT relative to equine licenses.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 New Subdivision; Equine Licenses. Amend RSA 435 by inserting after section 41 the following new subdivision:
Equine Licenses
435:42 Procuring License. Every owner or keeper of an equine as defined by RSA 436:93 4 months old or over shall annually, cause it to be registered, numbered, described, and licensed for one year in the office of the clerk of the city or town in which the equine is kept. The license shall be furnished by the clerk at the expense of the city or town. Regardless of when the license is obtained, the license shall be effective from May 1 of each year to April 30 of the subsequent year.
435:43 Vaccination Required. Before a license is issued under the provisions of this subdivision, the owner or keeper of an equine shall furnish to the clerk verification from a licensed veterinarian that the equine has been vaccinated against rabies
435:44 Part of Year. An owner of an equine may at any time have it licensed until the ensuing May 1 and a person becoming the owner or keeper of an equine not duly licensed after May 1 shall cause it to be registered, and licensed as provided in RSA 435:42.
435:45 Transfer. A license duly recorded shall be valid in any part of the state, and may be transferred with the equine licensed.
435:46 Fees.
I. The fee for every license for a year or portion of a year shall be $25 for all equines.
II. Of the fee described in paragraph I:
(a) $10 shall be retained by the municipality to be used for animal control costs.
(b) $10 shall be deposited in the general fund.
(c) $5 shall be deposited in the state veterinarian s fund established under RSA 435:51.
435:47 Payment of Fees. Clerks of the towns and cities shall issue equine licenses, receive the money for the licenses, and pay the same into the treasuries of their respective towns and cities on or before June 1 each year. The clerks shall return to their respective town or city treasurer a sworn statement of the amount of moneys thus received and paid over by them.
435:48 Records.
I. Clerks of towns and cities shall keep a record of all licenses issued by them, with the names of the keepers or owners of equines licensed, and the names, registered numbers and descriptions of all such equines. Clerks of towns and cities shall furnish yearly to the local governing body a list of those owners who have failed to renew their license for use in preparing the warrant of unlicensed equines.
II. With the owner s consent, a veterinarian may report the euthanizing or death during treatment of a licensed equine to the town or city clerk in order to have the record reflect that the equine was euthanized or died. A veterinarian providing such a report may also provide the town or city clerk with the mailing and street addresses of the owner of the equine. Written reports, if any, shall be destroyed after receipt by the town or city clerk, and any resulting record reflecting the equine s death shall not specify the manner or cause of death.
435:49 Account. Each city and town treasurer shall keep an accurate and separate account of all moneys received and expended by such treasurer under the provisions of this subdivision relating to equines.
435:50 Forfeiture. Whoever is the owner or keeper of an equine and who fails to license or renew the equine license pursuant to RSA 435:42 shall forfeit $25 to the town or city clerk of the municipality in which the equine is kept. If the forfeiture is not made to the town or city clerk within 15 calendar days of the notice of forfeiture, the case may be disposed of in a district court as a violation with a fine not to exceed $50, notwithstanding the provisions of RSA 651:2, IV. A forfeiture shall not relieve the owner or keeper of the requirement of proper licensing of the equine as required by RSA 435:42. Any forfeitures collected under this section may be retained by the city or town for the administration and enforcement of this chapter.
435:51 State Veterinarian s Fund.
I. There is hereby established in the office of the state treasurer a state veterinarian s fund which shall be kept distinct and separate from all funds. Five dollars from each fee collected in RSA 434:47 shall be credited to such fund. Such fund shall be nonlapsing and continually appropriated to the department of agriculture, markets and food, state veterinarian for the carrying out of his or her duties.
II. The fee established under RSA 435:47 shall accrue and be paid to the department on June 1 of each year.
2 New Subparagraph; State Veterinarian s Fund. Amend RSA 6:12, I(b) by inserting after subparagraph (276) the following new subparagraph:
(277) Moneys deposited in the state veterinarian s fund established in RSA 435:51.
3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect July 1, 2009.
LBAO
09-0777
01/14/09
HB 427-FN-A-LOCAL
AN ACT relative to equine licenses.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food and the New Hampshire Municipal Association estimate this bill will increase state and local revenue, and increase local expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2010 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on county revenue or state and county expenditures.
METHODOLOGY:
The Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food states that this bill will require that all equines in the state are licensed annually for $25 collected by the town or city clerk in the municipality in which they are kept, with the licensing fee revenue being distributed amongst the municipalities involved ($10), the state general fund ($10), and a newly established, continually appropriated State Veterinarian s fund ($5). Using 2 different formulas, the Department estimated between 19,000 and 24,000 horses will require licensure in the state, with the number remaining static from year to year. The Department further assumed an estimated owner compliance of 80%. The range of the estimated revenue increase annually is as follows:
Department s
Estimates of 80% of Municipal State General State Veterinarian s
Equines Estimate portion ($10) Fund portion ($10) Fund portion ($5)
19,000 15,200 $152,000 $152,000 $76,000
24,000 19,200 $192,000 $192,000 $96,000
The Department also states the bill will require administrative work to process the receipts. It assumes that this work will be undertaken by a Data Control Clerk II (LG 12, Step 5) currently on staff at the Department and will require approximately a week s worth of time. While this bill is not requesting additional positions, the Department states the additional work required under this proposal may impact the existing duties of the Department s current staff member. The Department also estimates that there would be an indeterminable increase to local expenditures, as the various town/city clerks would be responsible for collection of the fees and its associated cost.
LBAO
09-0777
01/14/09
The New Hampshire Municipal Association states that this bill would increase local revenue by $10 for each license granted (to be used for animal control costs) and $25 for each forfeiture collected for non-compliance (may be used to fund enforcement of this bill), but maintains that it cannot estimate the total impact on local revenue. The Association also states that the proposal would increase local expenditures by an indeterminable amount for collection costs.

 

 
New Jersey:
===========================================================
BACKGROUND + FEDERAL & STATE ACTIONS TO TAKE
===========================================================
Those in favor of horse slaughter for human consumption claim U.S. slaughter
plants are better regulated than kill floors in Mexico and Canada. Opponents
of a horse slaughter ban contend abandonment/starvation of horses (because
caretakers can't finance their care) is far worse than slaughter. This line
of reasoning overlooks:
-   Americans don't eat horsemeat and the majority oppose killing horses for meat.
-   Horses aren't bred for meat and thus not checked for disease, pathogens prior to slaughter.
-   Animal abandonment is illegal. Offenders should be charged, not permitted to profit from killing horses.
-   Cow and pig slaughter methods used on horses are inhumane for these long-necked animals.
There are too many horses due to overbreeding in industries such as Premarin
and Prempro (HRT drugs from mare's urine); carriage horses; riding stables,
etc. Rather than study feasibility of new slaughterhouses, proponents ought
to question: “Why are so many animals sent to slaughter, starved or abandoned
by owners who refuse to take responsibility for their horses' humane care?"
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
State Bills Related To Horse Slaughter
To read a state bill, go here:
http://www.navs.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=7757
SUPPORT New Jersey A551: Referred to Assembly Agriculture & Natural
Resources Committee 1-8. Bans horse slaughter; horseflesh for consumption.
SUPPORT New York A3736: Referred to Committee on Agriculture 1-28. Prohibits
slaughter of horses for human consumption.
SUPPORT Arkansas SCR 11: Read twice by Senate and referred to Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development 3-5 Urges horse
owners to take responsibility for the humane treatment and care of horses
during this time of economic crisis.
OPPOSE Arizona SCM 1001: Senate first reading 1-29. Urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Arkansas HCR 1004: Passed House 1-29, read twice by Senate and
referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development
1-29. Requests congressional support of horse processing facilities.
OPPOSE Idaho HJM5: 3rd reading in House 3-12. Urges Congress to oppose
federal legislation that interferes with a state's ability to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HB 583: Placed on House calendar for second reading and
short debate 2-25. Repeals the state ban on the slaughter of horses.
OPPOSE Illinois HR 160: In House, referred to Rules Committee 3-10. Urges
Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses and
the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Iowa SR 16: Resolution filed, referred to Rules & Administration 3-9.
Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation to ban the slaughter of horses
and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Kansas HCR 5004: Adopted as amended by Agriculture and Natural
Resources 2-17. Resolution urges US Congress to oppose federal legislation
to ban the slaughter of horses and the transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota SF 133: Senate refers to Agriculture and Veterans 1-22.
Resolution urging Congress to oppose federal legislation banning the
slaughter of horses and the transport of horses to slaughter.
OPPOSE Minnesota HF 840: House first reading, referred to Agriculture, Rural
Economies & Veteran Affairs 2-16. Resolution urges Congress to oppose
a federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri HCR 19: House pass 3-11. Urges Congress to oppose a federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Missouri SCR 8: Reported to House 3-5. Urges Congress to oppose a
federal ban on horse slaughter and transport of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Montana HB 418: Passed 2-18, now in Senate, hearing 3-5. Authorizes
investor owned horse slaughter plants.
OPPOSE North Dakota SCR 4021: Passed Senate. Urges Congress to recognize the
need for regulated horse processing facilities in the United States.
OPPOSE North Dakota HB 1496: Introduced 1-19, passed 2-18. Lets Department
of Commerce conduct equine processing facility feasibility study.
OPPOSE South Carolina SCR 480: Senate referred to Committee on Agriculture
and Natural Resources 2-25. Urges Congress to oppose federal legislation
interfering with a state's ability to direct transport/processing of horses.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 2: Senate adopted 2-3-09, House of Representatives
Concurred in Resolution, Passed 2-5-09. Urges reinstatement and funding of a
federal inspection program for horse slaughter and euthanasia facilities.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 4: Passed Senate 2-19, passed House 2-23. Supports
transport of horses out of the state and country.
OPPOSE South Dakota SCR 10: Senate Adopt Resolution, Passed 3-10. Supports
efforts in other states to address need for equine slaughter/processing in U.S
OPPOSE South Dakota SB 114: Senate appropriations deferred, passed 2-5.
Provides for study of feasibility of horse slaughter plant in South Dakota.
OPPOSE Tennessee HB 1361: Referred to Agriculture 2-19. Eliminates packaging
and labeling requirements for horsemeat.
OPPOSE Utah HJR 7: Passed House. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation to ban horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter.
OPPOSE Wyoming HJR 8: Signed into law. Urges Congress to oppose federal
legislation that would interfere with a state's authority to direct the
transport or processing of horses.
=============================================================
CONTACT INFORMATION
=============================================================
1. Below is a sample letter about the FEDERAL (NATIONAL) Prevention of
Equine Cruelty Act of 2009 (H.R. 503). You may use letter as written to send
to your Representative and Senators in Congress, in Washington D.C.
2. There are also many STATE BILLS to facilitate horse slaughter. Take a
minute to see if YOUR STATE is listed above. Modify the sample letter to
include the name of the state bill and your argument against it.
--  You have CONGRESSIONAL officials who represent you in Washington DC.
     These are your FEDERAL LEGISLATORS.
--  You also have STATE officials who represent you in your state's capitol.
     These are your STATE LEGISLATORS.
FIND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR YOUR FEDERAL & STATE LEGISLATORS HERE:
*    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L
*    http://www.votesmart.org/

 

 

Please see State Level Laws Page 2 For More State Laws.  Click Here.

Search for:

 
Dedicated to the equine rescues who save horses every day.
 
Do you have something you would like added to this page?
Email me at:
 
 
Please visit our other sites also!