From: Susan E. Hendrix
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 4:40 PM
Subject: Rebuttals
 
In addition to our main talking points, here are my thoughts on some suggested  rebuttals for predictable questions:

Position Statements

"As both Americans and Texans, this goes against our culture.  We do not breed our horses to be food animals any more than we breed dogs and cats to be eaten.  Horse slaughter is a "dirty little secret" every Texan should be ashamed of.  I know I am."  

"U.S. Senator John Cornyn ruled just last year when he was Texas Attorney General that these horse slaughter plants were illegal and must shut down or face criminal prosecution. It's regrettable that the Republican leadership doesn't respect his opinion on this issue."     

"Texas is the only state that slaughters horses for human consumption.  If any American should love and respect the horse, it should be a Texan."  

Why are groups such as the American Quarter Horse Association supporting HB 1324?

Many members of the American Quarter Horse Association have stated they've never been polled on this issue, and that they are personally opposed to horse slaughter.  AQHA's leadership obviously does not reflect the sentiments of its members.  

Secondly, the AQHA and the American Paint Horse Association breed over 200,000 horses each year.  More horses than all other breeds combined.  It makes perfect sense they want slaughter as a convenient way of disposing of unprofitable horses.  

(Quarter horses of around six years of age are the typical horse found in the "kill pen"  of a slaughter house.)

Why is the Texas Medical Veterinary Association supporting HB 1324 if slaughter is inhumane?

That's a good question.  Why is TMVA supporting slaughter when the methods used at these slaughter plants are contrary to the American Veterinarian Medical Association's "Preferable" methods of euthanasia for equines?   It appears they have a definite conflict within their own profession.  

If their concern is to minimize the suffering of all horses, humane euthanasia should be the obvious choice for a horse that can no longer be provided for or is suffering. Veterinarians  know moreso than anyone that to equate slaughter with humane euthanasia is irresponsible and false.  Once again, the leadership does not reflect the sentiment of its members.

If the slaughter plants close, what do the anti-slaughter groups propose as a viable way to deal with the horse overpopulation problem?

Regrettably, and in large part due to irresponsible breeding within the horse industry, there are more horses than there are homes for them.  Horse rescue groups save the lives of thousands of horses every year and continue to grow in number.  But for the remaining horses who absolutely can no longer be provided for, humane euthanasia is the only responsible solution