AQHA Directors are elected by the members they represent. If the members don’t want them its very easy to replace them.
[QUOTE=KristiC;1865565]
Who is to say that there will be 90k+ horses unwanted(or homeless) per year when slaughter ends?
ALL of the horses that are dumped off at auctions or feedlots are not owned by poor people or people that are unable to take care/support their horses. Most(IMO) are LAZY people who take the easy way out…or ranchers/breeders that over produce and again take the easy way out. So if this easy way out(slaughter) is removed who says that a good percentage of the owners won’t be able to support their horses? OK so they have to feed their stock another year…big deal…maybe next year they won’t breed that mare that doesn’t produce well or maybe they will retrain/resell that pasture pet or maybe they will try to sell those camp horses to the public.
On another note.
I think I heard on the CSPAN webcast of the House Vote that the AQHA registers 150,000 a year. Is that true? Do we really need that many quarter horses or that # of any breed? Does anyone know how many TBs are registered each year?[/QUOTE]
The AQHA registers the most horses per year- followed by the paint registry, than TB, than STB- I believe. I’ll have to do some searching but there was a place on the net that listed the numbers of the major american breeds registered each year.
You also bring up a good point about auctions.The auction is a place for quick sales to reach a maximum sized local market. It’s cost effective for a seller to auction vs. long term sales, especially if the seller cannot or does not know proper marketing skills or can take the time for long term sales. It does not mean a horse is ‘unwanted’- simply means it’s being forced into the ‘express’ route of a sale if you will.
I sell many horses at auction alot of them I take from here to Tx. and Ok. Its a great place to sell the type horse I raise and it gives me a huge selection of buyers. Kill buyers? Not that I’ve ever seen when they go for $300,000 down to even $1500 theres just no profit for meat.
Also to add that kill buyers often take horse lots from auction to auction- in attempts to fetch higher prices on the way to processing. Many have preset fee agreements with auction houses to make it more cost effective.
Take ‘that process’ out of the equation and I don’t even see horse prices dropping all to much except at the real low end auction houses.
Country- I assume you are referring to breed select or registered stock sales. Not too many kill buyers there.
I guess I just don’t see the correlation in the fear that:
slaughter ends= horse value plummets and neglect increases.
There is no indicating evidence to prove that especially based on the states that HAVE a ban in place.
As I see it, if the ban become law then most horses asking price decreases by $600-1000. That amount comes from two things- the price of a killer buyer by the horses weight- $300-600 plus the cost of euthanasia- $200+/- plus the cost of burial/rendering service $150+/-
A horse of any breed that weighs 1000# today has a value of about $450+/- in a dead end sale. My vets euthanasia fee & farm call is $139 plus the rendering service, $125. That amounts to $700 and change off the asking price of ordinary riding horses of any breed- gaited, TB, stock type in my area. In metro areas the amount will be greater because it cost more for the same services. Folks in the midwest will have it made because prices on the two coast will dive…they’ll pick up nice horses for less money.
Doesn’t add up though.
Not every horse goes to the auction because it is not useful or aged or needing to be put down. There are other buyers at auctions besides kill buyers. Some auction don’t even HAVE kill buyers present.
Most people do not bring their infirmed horses to auction- as it has been pointed out by the USDA 90% of horses upon arrival at the slaughter house facility are in good flesh and not old.
The argument being proposed by pro-slaughter is that slaughterhouses set the base value of horses. In turn that would mean that EU market prices plus export and processing costs set the base value of american horse stock. I say that is hogwash. The health of our economy sets the base value of horse flesh. The horse slaughter industry would affect a mere tiny portion of horse value overall.
[QUOTE=county;1865737]
AQHA Directors are elected by the members they represent. If the members don’t want them its very easy to replace them.[/QUOTE]
Where do I vote? I have never gotten to vote to elect anyone and I have been a member starting in 2003.
Just visited my Coop today and on the BB were horses for sale for $300, one add was 3 horses for $500! I guess these people don’t know what the meat price is! I wonder if they know their horses are in jeopardy selling at that price. Or are they? How much profit would a meat buyer need, what is there buying price?
I don’t know of too many people who have brought their horses to an auction but the ones I do know of were in good weight, sleek, shiny, young to middle-aged and… seriously, perhaps incurably, NUTS. That’s something to think about when you see nice-looking horses in a kill pen. I have worked with unhandled PMU foals and mares, and seriously underweight neglect cases, but I’m not match for a whacko. But boy they can look purdy just standing there…
Yes, a human probably caused the nuttiness and maybe a completely dedicated person could undo it – with time. But to say that 70% of the horses in killpens “look good” is a bit short-sighted.
I don’t know of too many people who have brought their horses to an auction but the ones I do know of were in good weight, sleek, shiny, young to middle-aged and… seriously, perhaps incurably, NUTS. That’s something to think about when you see nice-looking horses in a kill pen. I have worked with unhandled PMU foals and mares, and seriously underweight neglect cases, but I’m not match for a whacko. But boy they can look purdy just standing there…
Yes, a human probably caused the nuttiness and maybe a completely dedicated person could undo it – with time. But to say that 70% of the horses in killpens “look good” is a bit short-sighted. Oh wait, just noticed you said 90%… where did that come from? I had heard 70%.
Maybe other countries have evolved to the point where they don’t have 90,000 “excess” horses to dispose of. Thank God.
Theres no country with as many horses as the U.S. same is true of many species of livestock and poultry. we kill more livestock then any country in the world.
Interesting article here; http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=2&subID=746
and this article;
“The Plight of the Unwanted Horse”:
Scope of the Problem by Nat T. Messer IV, DVM
For the past 15 years, on average, approximately 1-2% (75-150,000 horses) of the domestic equine population in the United States is sent to slaughter each year 1, with another 10-20,000 US horses being exported to Canada each year for slaughter, and an unknown number of horses being sent to Mexico for that purpose as well (eg: @ 4000 in 2004). In 1998, slightly more than 1% of the domestic equine population was sent to slaughter (approx. 75,000 horses). In comparison, according to the 1998 National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) Report, 1.3% of horses age 6 months to 20 years (approx 80,500 horses) on all premises surveyed either died or were euthanatized in 1997, while 11.1% of horses greater than 20 years of age (approx. 55,000 horses) on all premises surveyed either died or were euthanatized in 1997.2 Assuming these numbers are at least somewhat representative of what occurs annually, almost 200,000 deceased horses (3-4% of the total equine population) must be disposed of annually, one-third of which are being processed for human consumption, with the remainder being rendered, buried, disposed of in landfills, cremated or “digested”.
“Unwanted horses” represent a subset of horses within the domestic equine population determined by someone to be no longer needed or useful or their owners are no longer interested in or capable of providing care for them either physically or financially. Some unwanted horses will find new accommodations; however, most unwanted horses will likely be sent to slaughter with fewer numbers being euthanatized and disposed of through rendering or other means and still fewer simply abandoned and left to die of natural causes. Unwanted horses range from being essentially normal, healthy horses of varying ages and breeds to horses with some type of disability or infirmity, horses that are unattractive, horses that fail to meet their owner’s expectations for their intended use (eg: athletic ability, horses with non-life-threatening diseases, horses that have behavioral problems or horses that are truly mean or dangerous). In many cases, these horses have had multiple owners, have been shipped from one sale barn, stable, or farm to another, and have ultimately been rejected as eligible for any sort of responsible, long-term care.
When the number of unwanted horses mentioned above are combined with the 10,000 or so feral horses being maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on privately owned sanctuaries deemed to be un-adoptable or unwanted and 5,000 or so horses being held in short-term holding facilities operated by the BLM awaiting adoption plus some 20,000 or so displaced pregnant mares and their foals from the Pregnant Mare Urine (PMU) industry, one can readily see that the number of truly and/or potentially unwanted horses constitutes a significant number of horses to be dealt with each year and in the future.
To their credit, various equine welfare organizations, breed-specific organizations, and numerous benevolent equine welfare advocates and horse owners have made a conscientious and concerted effort to either provide care for unwanted horses, provide funding for the care of unwanted horses, or to find suitable accommodations for them in both the private and public sector. These efforts, along with widespread efforts to inform the public about the plight of the unwanted horse, and a relatively high demand for horses by prospective buyers presumably accounts for the nearly 80% decrease in the number of horses being sent to slaughter over the past 10 years. The carrying capacity for these retirement farms, rescue farms and sanctuaries, as they are called, is unknown at this point, but despite their noble efforts to provide care for many unwanted horses, the number of unwanted horses far exceeds the resources currently available to accommodate them all. The estimated cost of providing basic care for a horse range from $1800-$2400 per animal per year.3 Even well-meaning volunteers can become overburdened with unwanted horses, at times to the detriment of the horses under their care. Currently, there simply are not enough volunteers, funding or placement opportunities for all of the unwanted horses.
Why are there so many apparently unwanted horses? Is there, as some would suggest, a glut of horses in the United States today? Was there, then, an even larger glut of horses when 200-300,000 horses were being sent to slaughter in the late ‘80’s and early ‘90’s? For the past 5-10 years, the demand for horses on the part of those buying horses has been very good. Over the years, however, this demand has certainly run in cycles that frequently follow other economic trends. In general, when the demand for horses is low, then the number of unwanted horses increases, irregardless of what their bloodlines may be. Recent changes in various breed organizations’ rules, such as permitting the use of embryo transfer and frozen semen, have favored the production of horses, allowing breeders to produce more than one offspring per year from mares, and allowing breeders to more efficiently select for horses with desirable bloodlines or performance records. New technology will further facilitate this practice in the future. Unfortunately, even with the help of technological advances, not every mating will produce a horse that meets the expectations of an owner or buyer. For those in the business of breeding and raising horses, an unsold horse becomes a liability rather than an asset.
Currently, to the author’s knowledge, there is a lack of information about the demographics of unwanted horses other than the generalizations made previously, ie, not marketable, disabled or infirm, unattractive, lacking athletic ability, dangerous or mean. A more detailed study investigating the demographics of horses deemed to be unwanted would allow the horse industry to focus more appropriately on the problem. For instance, former racehorses are frequently singled out, as examples of unwanted horses when their racing careers end and they are not candidates for breeding or other athletic endeavors. There are undocumented estimates suggesting that less than 10% of the horses that go to slaughter are Thoroughbreds, but just how many of the 80,000 or so horses that went to slaughter last year in the US and Canada were former racehorses? What is the average age and sex of those unwanted horses? What are the types of things that cause them to be unwanted? Are they purebred or grade horses? Answers to questions such as these and many more need to be addressed to be able to understand the problem and potentially reduce the number of unwanted horses.
Whenever there are large numbers of unwanted horses as there are today, there is always concern for the welfare of these horses. According to Rebecca M. Gimenez, PhD, a member of the advisory board of the South Carolina Awareness and Rescue for Equines organization, in a letter to the editor in the April, 2004, issue of a prominent horse magazine4, “we have seen a huge upsurge in abuse and neglect cases over the last three years in our state alone.” She goes on to say, “Looking on the web and talking to veterinarians, farriers, and horse industry professionals all tells me that this isn’t only a South Carolina problem.” Neglect of horses takes many forms and is due to a variety of factors. Could this upsurge in neglect, referred to by Dr. Gimenez, be due to solely to an increasing number of uninformed horse owners unfamiliar with the proper care of horses; or could it be due purely to economic constraints created by the downturn in the economy since 9/11; or could it be due to the availability (or lack thereof) of affordable ways to responsibly dispose of unwanted horses brought about by regulations prohibiting burial of animal carcasses in some locales, costs associated with veterinary euthanasia and disposal by cremation, “digestion” or rendering, or fewer slaughter plants processing horses for human consumption? All of these factors must be considered when faced with this large number of unwanted horses and what should be done with them, always ensuring they are treated humanely and with dignity until the end of their lives"
[QUOTE=JoZ;1865873]
I don’t know of too many people who have brought their horses to an auction but the ones I do know of were in good weight, sleek, shiny, young to middle-aged and… seriously, perhaps incurably, NUTS. That’s something to think about when you see nice-looking horses in a kill pen. I have worked with unhandled PMU foals and mares, and seriously underweight neglect cases, but I’m not match for a whacko. But boy they can look purdy just standing there…
Yes, a human probably caused the nuttiness and maybe a completely dedicated person could undo it – with time. But to say that 70% of the horses in killpens “look good” is a bit short-sighted.[/QUOTE]
Oh, come on. I’ve been in horses for 31 years and can count the number of NUTS horses I have encountered without running out of fingers. They aren’t that common.
OTTB’s that no one properly let down from the track and then locked in a stall and overgrained? Check. I’ve seen those.
Horses that someone tortured to the point where they took 3-6 months to recover and stop being sour? Check. Seen those.
Horses with undiagnosed pain that they manifested as bucking or rearing? Check. Seen those.
But flat out nuts and dangerous, even for an experienced horseperson? I’m trying to think of all of the flat out nuts and dangerous horses I’ve ever encountered and I’m having trouble counting past five.
[QUOTE=SuperSTB;1865842]
Doesn’t add up though.
Not every horse goes to the auction because it is not useful or aged or needing to be put down. There are other buyers at auctions besides kill buyers. Some auction don’t even HAVE kill buyers present.
Most people do not bring their infirmed horses to auction- as it has been pointed out by the USDA 90% of horses upon arrival at the slaughter house facility are in good flesh and not old.
The argument being proposed by pro-slaughter is that slaughterhouses set the base value of horses. In turn that would mean that EU market prices plus export and processing costs set the base value of american horse stock. I say that is hogwash. The health of our economy sets the base value of horse flesh. The horse slaughter industry would affect a mere tiny portion of horse value overall.[/QUOTE]
Income verses expense. Say item is worth $300 today based on weight. Law passes making it illegal to slaughter. Item has no value on the market. Expense enters when disposing of the item ie: euthanasia and burial. Expense is now +/-$350, depends on where you live. Again, less $ in the middle of the country, more on the coast and in cities.
Folks know where the “dead end” sales are in their area. Even at the one in our area, the riding stock goes through first and the “others” go last and have been identified as not safe/suitable for riding horses for whatever the reason.
Totally depends on ones opinion of nuts and dangerous. What is to one person isn’t to another. The only definition that really matters is that of the horses owner.
Well the ones I’m aware of don’t amount to five (there are three) but I’m not in an unusual situation so I figured that number could be extrapolated out across the country and come to a considerably larger number. Those are in fact the only three horses I know that have gone to an auction, so that’s my experience, for what it’s worth.
And I mean nuts as in unpredictable, cannot be ridden or (in one case) handled at all by the owner, hence could not be sold as a riding horse or shown to a prospective buyer. One of them was self-harming which I consider to be a pretty good indication of major problems.
[QUOTE=SLW;1865982]
Income verses expense. Say item is worth $300 today based on weight. Law passes making it illegal to slaughter. Item has no value on the market. Expense enters when disposing of the item ie: euthanasia and burial. Expense is now +/-$350, depends on where you live. Again, less $ in the middle of the country, more on the coast and in cities.
Folks know where the “dead end” sales are in their area. Even at the one in our area, the riding stock goes through first and the “others” go last and have been identified as not safe/suitable for riding horses for whatever the reason.[/QUOTE]
I didn’t mean ‘math’ literally. I meant on the basis that meat prices would set the base value of horse stock in the USA at auction. Which would only be true if 1. Kill buyers were at the auction and 2. If they were buying everything not sold to private homes.
That just doesn’t happen at every auction. Kill buyers will pass up horses at auction ESPECIALLY if they don’t think it will NOT make the trip because slaughterhouses can’t slaughter dead horses they send them for rendering.
There are much larger contributing factors to look at when it comes to base value of horses.
[QUOTE=JoZ;1865997]
Well the ones I’m aware of don’t amount to five (there are three) but I’m not in an unusual situation so I figured that number could be extrapolated out across the country and come to a considerably larger number. Those are in fact the only three horses I know that have gone to an auction, so that’s my experience, for what it’s worth.
And I mean nuts as in unpredictable, cannot be ridden or (in one case) handled at all by the owner, hence could not be sold as a riding horse or shown to a prospective buyer. One of them was self-harming which I consider to be a pretty good indication of major problems.[/QUOTE]
If they’re self-harming, I would almost say brain tumor for sure. I know a horse that happened to…very sad. Fortunately the one I know was euthanized. Too bad not everybody has the decency to do the right thing in a case like that.
