According to the Federal Government Department Of Agriculture around 40,000horses are slaughtered each year in Australia for human consumption, mostly for overseas markets, the biggest of which is Japan and also includesFrance, Switzerland, Belgium and Luxembourg. (WARNING: Contains Graphic Images)

Around 20% of these horses – 8000 – come from feral stock, ie. brumbies. The rest will bedomestic stock, ex-race horses and the like. Around 52.8% of the horses carry recognisableracing brands. The rest are unbranded. Of the branded horses around 80% carry thoroughbredbrands while the remaining 20% carry Standardbred brands.

Research conducted by the RSPCA QLD and The Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, Universityof Queensland, show that close to 60% of the horses were over the age of seven years, whilethe remaining 40% were under seven years of age.

The horses are slaughtered and their meat processed in two onshore export-accreditedabattoirs located in South Australia and Queensland. In 2007 the average dollar value ofhorsemeat was $4.20 per kilo and value of horsemeat exported from Australia wasapproximately $8.39 million.

Since 2006 I have been monitoring a movement in the US which sought to ban slaughteringhorses for human consumption. Up to 2006 100,000 horses were slaughtered annually in the USwith their meat being destined for European dinner tables.

Animal welfare and US Horse Industry groups who strongly opposed this particular aspect ofthe slaughter industry successfully convinced a handful of politicians that it was wrong toslaughter horses for human consumption and the whole process of debate began. Over theensuing months the debate entered the pubic domain and gathered speed. Publicly in the US,horses seem to have a strong place in both the historical and cultural psyche of thecommunity, irregardless of whether people are actually involved with horses or not. Publicpressure and popular opinion mounted and a bill was tabled in government to ban theslaughter of the horses for human consumption. Despite a few hiccups – including clericalerrors and supreme court rulings – it looked increasingly likely by 2007 that the threestate-side processing plants, which slaughter 100,000 horses annually, would be shut downpermanently.

No provision had been made for the care and welfare of the 100,000 horses that have beensaved from slaughter.

With the state-side plants shut down stock agents began shipping horses to Mexico andCanada. After a couple of horrifying accidents involving semi-rollovers of horses packedinto cattle crates laws across the US were amended to effectively ban the land transport ofhorses for slaughter outside the US.

Since 2007 the horse slaughter for meat debate has raged back and forth across theUS like a great tide, or even a great tug of war, as laws are introduced to protect horsesand then overturned to the benefit of the abattoirs and stock agents. At the time of writingthis it looks as though privately owned and operated plants in some states may be able tobegin production again in the near future.

At this point I should say that I am not opposed to the slaughter of horses in abattoirs. Ido not like it. But I also understand – particularly in view of the horrifying neglect /drought cases at Lara, Tolmie, Kyneton in recent years – that sometimes destroying an animalis the kindest option. And, as responsible owners and industry members, sometimes the harddecisions are ours to make. If horses are to be slaughtered, as opposed to being left tosuffer slow, degrading and despairing deaths through neglect, then I also have no objectionto their meat being onsold for human consumption.

Jane Duckworth, author of "They Shoot Horses Don't They?" and editor of NetRider, agreessaying 'If horse lovers hate the idea of slaughterhouses for horses remember that thesebusinesses do perform a useful service for horse owners and the horse industry. In Februarythis year I had my own beloved horse put down by a licensed knackery worker on the propertyas I believe that shooting the horse on home ground in the correct way is more humane thathaving him or her put down with barbiturates by a vet. The problem of having to dispose ofthe body was also solved, and in an environmentally sound manner.'

If, however, the horse meat industry exists because we over-breed and / or breedspecifically for the meat industry then I am definitely opposed to the slaughter of horsesfor human consumption.

Eva Berriman, a veterinarian, qualified technical teacher and technical writer fromQueensland writes in her article Horse Slaughter andHorse Meat: The Facts "As with cattle and other types of livestock, the best meatcomes from younger animals in good condition with quality muscling. So it is not the old,broken-down horses tired of living that are killed at these two horsemeat abattoirs - theygo instead to one of the 30-odd knackeries throughout Australia, there to be processed forpetfood, fertiliser, hides etc. No, it is much younger horses mostly still in their primewhich are slaughtered for human consumption. Exempt from this group are usually pony anddraught types, which are less preferred for various reasons. Grey horses are not normallyaccepted either because of the likelihood of malignant melanoma, a human health risk.

So where are these quality younger animals, rarely past middle years, coming from? It isdifficult to get a breakdown of breeds/types sold for slaughter. The selling agents do notkeep a record and the abattoirs are not forthcoming. But even in the absence of documentedfigures, the finger must be pointed firmly at the racing industry, which has a very highattrition rate of fine quality, well-muscled horses still in their prime often with no roadopen except to a horsemeat abattoir."

Nicole Pearce, President of Horses In Drought Inc, one of many organisations providing helpand care for drought stricken horses along the Eastern States of Australia, says "What we dowith unwanted, severely debilitated or excess stock and why this is happening, is definitelya bone of contention in the current climate. Whilst I do not like abattoirs and knackeries,I do believe that they serve a significant purpose. What they choose to do with the byproducts in the end is I believe is superfluous to this discussion. Having said thatthough, I can categorically say that I would never sit down to a meal of horse."

On June 26 2007 The Age Newspaper ran an article Horses For Courses When Tuna Is OffThe Menu In Japan which looks at how the culinary trade in Japan is searching foralternative meats, in particular for Sushi dishes, in the face of falling Tuna Fish stocksworld wide – this trialling of different meats includes horse, a delicacy in some parts ofJapan. If Japan is one of our biggest importers of horse meat it is reasonable to assumethat we will see an increased demand for horse meat processed by the SA and QLD abattoirs asTuna Stocks continue to decline and prices rise.

You often hear the saying "there's no money in horses". I beg to differ. In fact Iwould go as far as to say there is a substantial economy in horses. The RIRDC report TheHorse Industry Contributing To The Australian Economy, published in 2001 says that theAustralian Horse Industry contributes around $6.3 billion dollars annually to the Australianeconomy. This figure includes the RIRDC estimates of profit made from horse meat in 1999 tobe around $11.5 million; the overall contribution to the industry was $25 million whichincludes labour, transport etc.

During the EI incursion of 2007 industry figures were revised with many industry bodiesestimating that the current industry, 7 years after the original study, was now worth around$9 billion annually.

The slaughter of 40,000 horses for human consumption annually in Australia is an importantissue that needs to addressed by our industry. If, for instance, horse lovers across thecountry, wanted to oppose the slaughter of horses for human consumption as has been done inthe United States , what is to become of those 40,000 horses and who will care for them?

This question, more than any other, was never satisfactorily answered by proponents of thebill to end horse slaughter in the US.

Barry Smyth, Australian Horse Industry Council President, says "The proposed USA legislationis a real concern to the US horse industry because there is no mechanism or funding proposed to cope with all these horses if they are to remain within the USA and belooked after properly - who will do it, where, what funds are available etc. etc.? And whatdo you do with them all when they eventually die anyway? The costs of this will beastronomical if it ever comes to pass. It will also raise more welfare considerations andconcerns that it hopes to solve."

The RIRDC report estimated that there was 68722 broodmares and 5059 breeding stallions in2001. Given that the RIRDC estimates around 10% of breeding stock won't produce live foals,and 20% of slaughtered horses are feral, that still leaves 32,000 domestic animals out of anestimated 61,850 horses produced each year that will be slaughtered in subsequent years.That's over half the horses Australia breeds annually that end up – at some point in theirlives – being slaughtered, although Barry Smyth from AHIC is quick to point out, "All horseswill eventually end up dead for various reasons ... Many studies indicate that the mostcommon reason for destruction of horses is old age, followed by colic and then lameness andinjuries. So slaughter for human consumption is way down the list of reasons of why horsesare destroyed or die."

However, Eva Berriman, writes in her article Horse Slaughter andHorse Meat: The Facts "A significant statistic is that the peak slaughter years ofthe 80s also saw the highest number of Thoroughbred foals born, culminating in a record23,697 in 1989. Apart from minor fluctuations, every year after that saw a steady decline toabout 17,000 foals born in 2004. This fall was paralleled by a decline in horsemeatproduction. It is logical to assume that the decreasing foal crop was heavily biasedtowards the lower end of the Thoroughbred market and therefore representative of those foalswhich, had they been born, would have been most likely to contribute to the horsemeattrade."

The breeding of horses in Australia also brings up another question as well as providing aninsight into how many horses may end up being "unwanted". If the average cost (private /domestic, ie not racing industry) of breeding a foal is $2290 (assuming it is on yourproperty and you have plenty of feed, this figure includes stuff like worming, feet, teeth,vet etc for both mare an foal over 18-24 months) to upwards of $6775 (this figure includesstuff like worming, feet, teeth, vet, full hard feeding, breed registration, insurance,purchasing gear, transportation etc for both mare an foal over 18-24 months) it makes youquestion why many people will breed a horse when they have to sell the foal for a minimum of$2290 just to break even; and more likely closer to $7000 as many people are having to hardfeed their horses. When you look at the costs of breeding like this – and keep in mind Ihaven't even calculated in stud fees, property payments such as mortgage, labour costs ortax – it is no wonder that many small stud businesses either a/ end up going broke or b/ endup being unable to care for their horses, or worse still, both.

Although we know that 40,000 horses are slaughtered for the meat industry, with 20% comingfrom feral stock, there is little accurate information about age, breed or type of horsegoing through the abattoirs. This lack of information extends to the simple knackeries whereadditional horses are slaughtered for pet food, fertiliser etc. Although some experiencedequine experts like Eva Berriman are willing to theorize on the origin of many of the horsessent for slaughter, there is little actual data, other than numbers, on the subject.

While the RSPCA /Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, University of Queensland study wasable to reveal that a little over half the horses slaughtered for meat came from the racingsector, the origin of the rest the horses remains unclear. Federal Government informationshows that around 20% overall of horses slaughtered are from feral stock but that stillleaves just under 30% that are of unknown origins.

If we were to tackle this as a community, or even as an industry, we would do well to knowwhere the abattoirs source their horses from. How do we track the birth, movement and deathof horses in Australia? One obvious answer is identification, a solution which also has hugeimplications for the welfare of horses.

Nicole Pearson, Victorian Horse Council / DPI feels that "identification [is linked] to theslaughter/live export for human consumption issue [because it] highlights the lack ofability to trace for any diseases present in the horses slaughtered; any chemicals usedduring its lifetime that would deem the animal unsuitable for consumption; and traceabilityto the previous owner [that could] avoid malicious actions such as theft and transport toslaughter".

Gail Ritchie, AHIC Director (NSW) and General Manager NCHA, also believes that the horsemeatissue is "another good reason why we need national identification of horses, because we haveno real way of getting the correct data needed" to accurately measure the number of horsesslaughtered each year in Australia, where they came from, how old or what type of horse theyare.

Julie Fielder, of South Australia's peak horse industry body – Horses SA – thinks thatidentification is a critical issue. "I believe the horse ID system brought into the UK andEurope permits owners to identify, on the papers, if the horse is to go for humanconsumption/slaughter or not. This is the first level of management, which would be mosteffective." UK Equine Passports do, in fact, allow for this however the primary reason forthe introduction of passports was to create a "control system to ensure that horses whichhave been treated with veterinary medicines not authorised for use in food-producing animalscannot be slaughtered for human consumption" (from Departmentfor Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), UK.).

A problem often encountered by welfare agencies, when attending reports of neglected horses,is trying to identify, and locate, the owners. This is especially true on large agistmentproperties where horses are kept in a group or common paddock. Suddenly welfare officerswill find that 'no-one' owns the horses in question!

More than any other, the issue of identification is one that seems to unify industry expertsfrom all corners. Jane Duckworth, author of "They Shoot Horses Don't They?" and editor ofNetRider, feels that "a national microchipping system is essential to id horses going tosaleyards and slaughterhouses and also so that neglectful owners can be traced andprosecuted". In a 2004 NetRider article on Horse Identification Jane outlines some of thepossible benefits of Horse ID including "in cases of theft; where health certificates mustbe issued; when horses are competing; when horses are sold; when contagious diseases aretrying to be controlled and for breeding purposes".

And not only the horse industry professionals, but in a poll I conducted a couple of yearsago the general horse community overwhelmingly voted that Horse ID Should be compulsory with80% answering "yes". In a second poll 79% of my readers voted microchipping as theirpreferred choice of Identification for horses (14% chose DNA; 7% chose branding). In termsof Horse Identification Microchipping – usually inserted under the skin on the neck of thehorse – is probably the most feasible. Where papers or passports can be lost, forged orstolen along with the horse, and branding is being phased out as a method of identification,Microchipping offers a permanent and reasonably fail safe method of identify a horse. Wherethe horse goes, it goes. The other failsafe method is DNA typing and recording where, aswith humans, a horse's DNA is unique and therefore a foolproof method of identification.

In either case the ID process need only occur once for the horse to be uniquely identifiedand recorded. Where DNA falls short however is in later identification of the horse, forexample where proof of identity is required at a show, during the sale of the horse, inwelfare cases or in cases of theft. Proving identity would require taking a sample from thehorse and sending it away for testing – a matter of days or even weeks. There is also therisk – albeit minimal – that samples could be mixed up. In cases of theft, and especially inwelfare where time is pressing, the collection and testing of samples could prove untimelyand, ultimately, disastrous. Second to that, every time an owner needed to prove the horse'sidentification they would have to send material for testing at the same fee they paid forthe original tests so there are ongoing costs involved.

Further to this, DNA services in Australia are limited, with only the University OfQueensland Equine Genetics Research Centre offering DNA typing and parentage services, andthen only to breed societies registered with the Australian Stud Book as I found out acouple of years ago. Further, the tests are expensive as opposed to those conducted byoverseas laboratories. It seems remarkable to me that DNA typing in Australia is offered insuch limited capacity. When university research centres struggle for funding you would thinkthey would open up to commercial ventures that will generate revenue. This can equally beapplied in the sphere of colour gene testing. The only option at present is to send samplesoverseas.

Microchipping by contrast allows immediate identification by use of a mobile hand heldscanner. Additionally lost or stolen horses could be reported by owners and/or the police tothe microchip registry where their files could be 'flagged'; any scan of the horse in thefuture would return a result showing the horse as lost or stolen and thus aid in itsrecovery. Cost is also minimal with the average price of Microchipping at around the $65 to$75 mark.

Equestrian Australia (formerly EFA) was the first non racing equestrian peak body to adoptmandatory microchipping of registered horses in 2008. This followed the uniformmicrochipping of horses vaccinated during the EI outbreak in Queensland and NSW.

Another important issue to consider is industry membership. While many of us deplore theabuse and neglect of horses, are irate about the inadequacy of legislation regarding horsewelfare and don't like the idea of horses being slaughtered** unless we come together as aunified group there is little that we can individually do about it.

(**poll results show that horse welfare was the number one [45% of voters] industry issuethat most people were concerned about in 2007; of that, 27% of people identified Unwantedhorses being abandoned / neglected as the most important followed by Unwanted horses beingsent to slaughter 20%; and Laws designed to protect horses 13%)

The impression I often receiving when talking to people about joining an industry peak bodyis that they fear that a centralised council will somehow start telling them what they canor can't do; far from it, a centralised horse industry body would afford the horse communityan opportunity to be represented, at a federal level, and actually have a say regardingissues like horse welfare legislation, access to trails, urban planning (another importantindustry issue because it relates to the loss of land and the safety of our horses).

Look at it another way. Let's say one horse person goes to the minister foragriculture and says "I want you to change the laws so that they better protect horses."What chance does that person have of a/ being heard in government or b/ effecting change?However, if 20,000 horse people (not unreasonable considering Pony Club Australia alone hasaround 75,000 members) went to the Minister for Agriculture there's a much bigger likelihoodof being both heard and taken seriously.

Horse slaughter in Australia – particularly as we have a multi-billion dollar horse industryand particularly as we are a drought prone country – is an issue that I believe we need toexamine and take responsibility for. In the first instance I believe we need to collect farmore accurate information and a national horse identification process will go a long way toachieving this (not to mention the spin off benefits for horse owners – proof of identity /ownership, prevention of theft, aid in recovery of lost and stolen horses). In the secondinstance industry membership will go a long way to ensuring the strength and continuedgrowth of our industry because it will enable us to take control of the issues that affectus and actively do something about them ... most particularly in regards to welfare of ourequine friends.

Images of horse slaughter from: Anepidemiological survey of the dentition and foot condition of slaughtered horses inAustralia, by Amanda Doughty B.Sc. (Massey University), School of Animal Studiesand The Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, The University of Queensland, Gatton.

Comment on this article using the Comment Function below. Discuss this article with otherusers on the Horse Forums.

Joomla Templates and Joomla Extensions by ZooTemplate.Com

Comments  

 

0 #2 Hillydale 2010-06-08 08:20

However, unless one is a vegetarian or vegan, one cannot mount an ethically consistent argument against the eating of horses by humans (or pets). They are no more deserving of protection from early slaughter than cows, pigs, chickens etc which are also sentient beings, capable of feeling fear, pain and having meaningful relationships with others of their kind. The issue may be the humaneness of the sourcing of the horses for slaughter (as with factory farming) but if you eat cows, lambs, chooks etc, you can't then claim that there is something inherently wrong with eating a horse.

 

 

0 #1 dinozzofan 2009-05-18 03:14

Very imformative article. Raises key issues and should help with awareness.

 

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post

JComments