![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
altivoSome of you have heard me condemning horse slaughter before. Now we have an even uglier menace to fight, one that ties right into the continued tolerance of the American people for the slaughter of horses for their flesh.
The 1971 Wild Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act forced the Bureau of Land Management to stop all hunting and slaughter of wild horses and burros on Federal lands. It allowed instead for population management by other means, including capture and adoption. Under pressure from ranchers who are allowed to use these Federal lands for grazing at ridiculously low costs, the BLM has continued to capture large numbers of these beautiful wild animals. Because the 1971 act prohibited slaughter or sale for slaughter, and bound adopters in the same way, American wild mustangs and burros have been largely safe from greed-motivated roundups and no longer serve as a supply of cheap meat for pet food or for export to countries such as Japan, France, and Belgium.
However, emboldened by the election results in November, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana slipped an amendment into a Federal spending bill that removes all protections for wild equines presently held by the BLM in short or long-term holding facilities. The number of these horses and burros is estimated at 22,000. Senator Burns' shameful amendment authorizes the BLM to sell all these horses to the slaughterhouse without any further review or responsibility. It also mandates the BLM to sell at auction all wild horses who are over 10 years old or who have been offered for adoption 3 times without success. Any buyer at such auctions can immediately turn purchased animals over for slaughter.
American wild horses will again be served on foreign dinner tables for the profit of a few greedy and soulless individuals. President Bush has already signed the bill that included the Burns amendment into law.
Please take time to write to your senators and congressional representative to request their support for H.R. 297, which will stop the Burns amendment and restore protection to our wild equines. For more information, consult the web site of the American Wild Horse Preservation Council.
It is time for Americans to say no to the continued efforts of our politicians to destroy every shred of wild land and wildlife left in the United States, solely for short term commercial gain or political advantage.
--'Tivo
The 1971 Wild Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act forced the Bureau of Land Management to stop all hunting and slaughter of wild horses and burros on Federal lands. It allowed instead for population management by other means, including capture and adoption. Under pressure from ranchers who are allowed to use these Federal lands for grazing at ridiculously low costs, the BLM has continued to capture large numbers of these beautiful wild animals. Because the 1971 act prohibited slaughter or sale for slaughter, and bound adopters in the same way, American wild mustangs and burros have been largely safe from greed-motivated roundups and no longer serve as a supply of cheap meat for pet food or for export to countries such as Japan, France, and Belgium.
However, emboldened by the election results in November, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana slipped an amendment into a Federal spending bill that removes all protections for wild equines presently held by the BLM in short or long-term holding facilities. The number of these horses and burros is estimated at 22,000. Senator Burns' shameful amendment authorizes the BLM to sell all these horses to the slaughterhouse without any further review or responsibility. It also mandates the BLM to sell at auction all wild horses who are over 10 years old or who have been offered for adoption 3 times without success. Any buyer at such auctions can immediately turn purchased animals over for slaughter.
American wild horses will again be served on foreign dinner tables for the profit of a few greedy and soulless individuals. President Bush has already signed the bill that included the Burns amendment into law.
Please take time to write to your senators and congressional representative to request their support for H.R. 297, which will stop the Burns amendment and restore protection to our wild equines. For more information, consult the web site of the American Wild Horse Preservation Council.
It is time for Americans to say no to the continued efforts of our politicians to destroy every shred of wild land and wildlife left in the United States, solely for short term commercial gain or political advantage.
--'Tivo
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-02-10 04:48 pm (UTC)Another classic case of money talking louder than citizens can.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 01:17 am (UTC)There is perhaps the slightly comforting possibility that one or more of these horses will have been treated with, at some point, a drug such as phyenlbutazone that leaves residues in muscle tissue. When humans eat such meat, it doesn't do them any good at all. :p
Not much of a comfort, I admit. In fact, none, considering the horrific truth of the matter. Still, the thought of a Frenchman with violent cramps etc, is something at least.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 03:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 04:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 06:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 08:35 am (UTC)The creep snuck it in silently as possible. Obviously he has election money from the open range ranchers or is one himself.
There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-11 06:37 am (UTC)There are "safe" sources for beef, namely the "predator-friendly" ranches ... though, unfortunately, they are more expensive. They will NOT kill wildlife even if their livestock is attacked, and they do not engage in open-range ranching. Such ranchers following this get death threats from other ranchers, not surprisingly.
The U.S.D.A. needs to be torn down and replaced, its way too cozy with the ranchers on many levels and ensure the open range ranchers have an unopposable rule in government.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-11 08:38 am (UTC)A boycott of all beef is quite workable. The difficulty with that is coming up with clear enough proof that open range ranchers are responsible for this policy change. I believe they are. But most Americans are so far removed from their food sources that you will never convince them. Better to just show photos of wild horses and what happens to them. That was sufficient in 1971 and will work again. Anger the beef industry and you'll have to fight megabucks spent on deceptive television advertising.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-11 10:14 am (UTC)I haven't bought one ounce of hamburger (nor had anyone buy an ounce for me) nor one piece of leather nor wool that could potentially come from an open range source since 2002. I am not and have not gone vegetarian, but several thousand dollars I would normally have spent on beef in this time has gone instead to other types of food.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-11 11:41 am (UTC)Wool I'm safe with. I know the farmers and in many cases the individual sheep that my wool comes from. :) I use substitutes for leather wherever practical, which isn't always everywhere. Meat I think I'd just omit from my diet rather than try to sort out the sources in an industry devoted to keeping the consumer from finding out.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-12 08:22 pm (UTC)There is one here probably not getting much attention but of the ones I have looked through is probably the most relevant:
http://www.apnm.org/campaigns/ADC/
All products from public lands ranching should be boycotted ... this is beef, wool, leather, etc. If you have friends who are sheep ranchers (but are only on their private land) then great, but sheep ranchers abuse public lands as cattle ranchers do. You'd probably know more than I, but I don't believe there are any dairy cows on public lands ranches, nor pigs, chickens, turkey, etc. Going vegetarian, of course, would be a simple solution if you're inclined to do so .... I would like to but am too lazy to make that final leap. I had no problems cutting out beef, and I used to really love beef ... I loved all-you-can-eat steak buffets in Texas. I haven't had a tiny bit of it though, and I don't miss it. I'm actually surprised how easily I've found it is for me to stick with it, and I haven't even felt tempted to go back to beef.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-12 10:03 pm (UTC)I'm a lapsed vegetarian. I was very careful for years, but have become lazy. It's easy to be vegetarian when you do your own cooking, but difficult when you are invited out by friends or taken to a restaurant.
Here in the midwest, our sheep products are all pretty much local. And there are no public lands here at all, so my friends who keep sheep (as I do myself) are not users of public land benefit. However, the beef in the markets could come from anywhere and you can't find out where.
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-13 04:39 am (UTC)Most beef you can't tell, no, but you can find some specialty beef ... anything "predator-friendly" is, to a greater extent, wildlife-friendly ... you can actually buy it online (though to make shipping refrigerated beef economical online, its best in larger amounts like over 25 lbs)
If you're interested in "wildlife-friendly" beef, here are a couple sources:
http://www.lasatergrasslandsbeef.com/
http://www.conservationbeef.org/
http://www.ervins.com/
Re: There is something else you can do ...
Date: 2005-02-13 07:08 am (UTC)The other two do not sell retail, nor do they reach the midwest in wholesale as far as I can tell. Both websites are rather poorly put together, and do not perform well, which is a bad sign IMHO. Better not to have a web presence than to have an amateurish one.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 05:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-11 06:04 pm (UTC)