Are you sure the beef you buy is slaughtered by lethal injection? What do they inject them with?

Most slaughterhouses I know of use captive bolt, which is nearly instantaneous. I would assume that an organic ranch would use the same method since it's the fastest (and therefore most humane).

Horses arrived originally with the Spaniard Conquistadores. Prior to that, American Indians used dogs as beasts of burden. Horses may be a part of our culture's history under Manifest Destiny, but so is genocide and colonialism.

I had horses for a while growing up. I loved them, but as I grew older I no longer had the time to care for them, and our finances could no longer support them, the way they should be. They were sold to other people for use, not slaughter, but had this not happened, we probably would have had to sell them to a slaughterhouse, as the cost of getting rid of the bodies was very high in our area. Horses are great if you have land and lots of money, or lots of land and some money, but most people in the U.S. have neither.

It was a poor idea to close all the slaughterhouses. They should have been properly regulated, and the bad ones shut down. It's sad that these horses are hurt and scared when many of them die, but a lot of humans also hurt and scared when they die.

Hear this, horsemeat eaters and provocateurs: If you do not understand the intricate web of ties and the industry players' actions and intentions, the reality of horse keeping/owning, you are simply unqualified to have an opinion!

I cannot believe the unmitigated gall of so many writers here who have absolutely no knowledge of the horse industry, jumping in with their aggressive thoughts advocating cruelty and violence. Further, to blame those of us who support horse humane death ONLY (which slaughter never was and still is not here in the US) as being "emotional" or "sentimental" is ludicrous and borders on insanity -- you know, the kind where you insist you have important views yet you are completely ignorant of an issue.

Seriously, breed associations NEED TO BE HEAVILY REGULATED so they QUIT PROMOTING INDISCRIMINATE BREEDING. Sure, they don't want to be regulated but they have proven they are incapable of doing what is right for their breeds or for animals in general. They have created fantasy worlds where their hordes of poorly bred horses that are physically functionally incapable of any use (ride, drive, etc.) are still highly promoted, solely to incite the "winning" pipe dreams and desires of so many low end breeders. The associations' inability to do the right and ethical thing -- promoting only high quality breeding which means the market contracts but so do their registration revenues -- translates to OVERPOPULATION of horses. This, people, is the EFFECT, not the CAUSE! Slaughter may be held up as a solution to the EFFECT but it does NOTHING to address the CAUSE of horse overpopulation. Until breed associations are forced into limiting annual approved registrations, we will continue to face a surplus of horses.

Breed associations can choose to fix this by limiting their acceptance of presented foals, requiring stallions and mares be inspected and approved (or rejected) for soundness and potential BEFORE they are bred, but they choose not to do so. Why? Because they won't make as much money if they accept fewer paid registrations.

No wonder the AQHA, largest breed association in the country, is all for slaughter. It's a way to pay off so many of the poor sap breeders of the lower quality animals that will NEVER make it in any show or performance ring. WHY SHOULD THESE IMMORAL LOSERS BE REWARDED AND PAID FOR BREEDING USELESS HORSES BY ALLOWING THEM TO SELL ("RECOUP THEIR INVESTMENT") THE "EXCESS" FOR SLAUGHTER? That is the height of immorality and unethical behavior. No wonder some here talk of how humans are losing their soul - what kind of lower life forms are we humans now, to concoct such a travesty and revel in it, indeed refuse to change it and rather advocate creating lots of excess animals and then also making money by killing them?

What is it, are people so stupid or are they are just unwilling to see the entire picture here? Why is it that this is skimmed over when we as a society are voraciously against puppy mills and dog fighting, other areas where animals are overbred - AND DISCARDED TOO - for one purpose: to make money for the sicko humans involved? How is this any different? It's not. And nothing is going to get better until these out of control breed associations are held responsible for their immoral and unethical objectives of "promoting and increasing the breed". Just look at the way the AQHA trumpets their numbers, how "successful" they are as the "biggest" breed association in the US. Ugh, bigger is not always better (look at GM, Chyrsler) and knowing the back story makes one ill to read such blathering boasts.

I'm sad to say I belong to the human race when I have to share it those who support this kind of "business". I really wish our elected officials would address the CAUSE and the EFFECT. At least that way, we'd have something to be proud about, some sense of moving into human evolution as the animals who are supposed to have the highest intelligence, intellect and a real soul.

lyonsjc: You seem to have trouble distinguishing between humans and horses. Humans= legal rights. Don't eat. Horses= animals- tasty. eat. Simple enough for you?

The "difference" continually cited between horses and other livestock is that horses are companions that live in close contact with humans.

This may be true, but the statement says much more about our view of horses than it does about any particular characteristic of the horse. It says "we like horses close to us and we anthropomorphize animals that we're close to." Only by anthropomorphizing them could we talk about "betraying" them - as if they have some sort of preconceived idea about how they should or should not die. Pigs are considerably more intelligent than horses but we have not romanticised pigs, so we don't have a problem with eating them.

If you want to see a society that truly respects horses, look at the Kazakhs or the Kirghiz. Their and horses' lives are intimately entwined, they provide transportation, milk, skin and food. They take incredibly good care of their horses, and they eat them as well. And nobody sees it as betrayal.

If horses are slaughtered cruelly, or in some way that causes them more suffering than any other animal we use for food, then that clearly needs to be addressed, but to suggest that we are unable to figure out how to deal with that and therefore shouldn't think about that, is an insult to the intelligence.