“Offal” Foodies Wear Badge of Shame

Written By:  Heather Clemenceau

Foodies,  food groupies,  or foodniks.  Quelle horreur!  When I hear these terms, it makes me cringe.  I’ve come to be repulsed by it,  because nowadays it’s associated with “gourmand” or “epicure,”  and while these are not negative terms,  most actual foodies are now clearly associated with foie gras,  pigs feet,  octopus,  sweetbreads (or offal), and of course,  horsemeat.

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying luxurious items or tasteful food.  But people who tend to describe themselves as foodies are usually those same people who label themselves as members of a caste of society that is superior to the others.  “I’m better than you because I’m more open-minded towards my food.  I would never eat instant ramen like you.”

The more lives sacrificed for a dinner, the more impressive the eater. Aside from horsemeat,  some of the cruelest meals consist of thirty duck hearts in curry, or ortolan, endangered songbirds fattened up, in pitch-dark cages, who by tradition, have their eyes put out before being force-fed for weeks and finally drowned in a snifter of brandy. The eating of these animals as well as non-food horses is amoral, callous, and profoundly self-absorbed.  Such machismo coming out of an evening spent sitting in a goddamn chair….

Chef Tom Colicchio is one of People’s 2007 “Sexiest Men Alive?”  Why does he deserve this title? Why do chefs in general receive such an unwarranted amount of attention?

The term foodie also implies that you’re dealing with a person who knows a lot about food in general.  And if you’re a chef with a following of chef groupies, you’re going to look extra stupid when it becomes public knowledge that you really don’t know much about food after all.  The attention lavished upon some chefs is unseemly.  It sure doesn’t explain why People magazine dubbed Tom Colicchio one of 2007’s Sexiest Men Alive. (Sorry, but I just don’t see it.)

Chef Danny Mongeon,  of the new horsemeat-serving resto “Hooch,”  shall wear the badge of shame in this blog post.  Mongeon became somewhat infamous (although his groupies claim he was already famous!) by declaring that he was introducing horse tartare at Hooch in an interview with the Ottawa Citizen.

“I did a lot of research on the farm where I’m sourcing from, La Petite Nation. I’ve been there. I’ve seen the horses. A lot of these people are telling me that we’re serving old race horses and all of this bad stuff, but I just ignored it because a lot of their sources were incorrect.” ~ Danny Mongeon

Here’s your meat still on the hoof at LPN,  Chef Mongeon (Caution – Disturbing):

Operating under the assumption that LPN is a “farm” that apparently produces purpose-bred horses has just become problematic for Chef Mongeon.  He  just ran head first into the Canadian and American taboo against hippophagy.  Secondly,  Les Viandes de la Petite Nation is not a “farm,” it is a slaughterhouse which has been cited numerous times for cruelty and not following CFIA mandated slaughter methods. It is also the slaughterhouse that killed Frank Stronach’s racehorse, Backstreet Bully, despite the fact that his vet records were faxed to La Viandes de la Petite Nations showing he had illegal drugs in his system and that his previous owners and Stronach Racing were all willing to take him back. He ended up at LPN courtesy of a kill buyer falsifying his EID (Equine Information Document).

Mongeon prepares the awful offal.  And I really hope that’s some kind of food stain rather than dirt on your fingernails, Chef.

Mongeon, despite being informed to the contrary, absolutely refuses to acknowledge that these horses are mostly cast-off pets, discarded standardbred or thoroughbred race horses, mares in foal, summer camp horses, trail horses, Amish/Mennonite work/cart horses that have been worked into the ground.  When facts from independent sources such as the Toronto Star and Latitude News were posted on the restaurant’s Facebook page, he and his indie followers simply repeated the same derp over and over again.  This discussion also moved to an Ottawa Foodie forum where horse advocates were harassed for promoting truthful dialogue.  I wonder how many people would eat horsemeat if they were not lied to about its true origin and the veterinary residues it often contains?

This comment was one of many posted on an Ottawa Foodie forum. It received no condemnation whatsoever from the group, yet the horse welfare posters were harassed because we killed the horsemeat-eatin’ mood. Surely the dry-heave factor on that particular post should have prompted some objection, certainly over anything we had posted?

Yes, it’s true – the Zombie Apocalypse is real.

Mongeon will NOT tell his patrons the truth about the horsemeat he serves.  He and his groupies only respect those customs, traditions, beliefs, cultures—old and new, domestic and foreign—that call on them to eat more, not less, and without regard for where it is sourced.  Mongeon’s claims about the happy LPN “farm” are meaningless. All that’s required to perpetuate his stupid unenlightened remarks are dull-headed food freaks to circulate the dogma.  It’s time to hold chefs accountable for the misinformation they perpetuate about their food sources.

This is the pretty unrecognizable cooked version of the pig’s foot shown to the left.

Part of what makes Mongeon’s claims about horses and LPN so obnoxious is that the Federal Health of Animals Act is not enforced, which would protect sick, pregnant and unfit horses, and prohibit overcrowding; the Recommended Code of Practice for Care and Handling of Farm Animals: Transportation of Horses, is not enforced. The CFIA does not enforce their own weak rules that slaughter bound horses must not be transported for longer than 36 hours straight and must be provided with feed, water and rest at required intervals. Double-decker trailers are still allowed in Canada. Horses are shipped in crowded trailers over long distances, and often arrive injured, sometimes fatally. Horses, unlike most livestock, do not travel well. So, suffice it to say, they don’t always respond well when being transported from kill auctions in the U.S. to federally licensed slaughterhouses in Quebec and Alberta.

Since 2007, inspectors have been banned from the kill floor for their own safety, since the adoption of firearms has been implemented to stun animals, so their role is basically an administrative one now. So how could inspectors intervene when humane incidents have occurred, as revealed by a CBC probe and in undercover video by the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition?  I guess Danny Mongeon’s “research” just never uncovered any of these uncomfortable truths……

Apparently, there’s really no civilized value left that foodies or chefs cannot destroy.

IKEA Monkey Trial: A War Of Words With Casualties Mounting

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

The Darwin monkey trial is now over (pending a decision from Justice Mary Vallee).   In this blog post,  I’m not going to re-hash issues that have been more than adequately covered by the media;  for some time I’ve wanted to expand upon a previous blog post about the behind-the-scenes train wreck that has raged for months between former owner Yasmin Nakhuda supporters and Story Book supporters.  The “Darling Darwin Monkey” Facebook page has been a place where Ms. Nakhuda’s supporters have threatened to arrest everyone on earth who has responded negatively to their posts.  It’s a place where this group has proclaimed that no one takes them seriously and if you disagree with them, they will threaten to report you to the Secret Service AND the fashion police.  It’s a place where rainbows and unicorn farts are taken as a sign that Darwin will be returned to the plaintiff, rather than by the legal precedent of case law.  And lastly, if you decide to visit this magical Facebook page, be prepared for accusations of physical battery should you endeavour to explain the temperance movement’s expression “the right to swing your arm ends when it hits my face,” (generally credited to Oliver Wendell Holmes).  Those “live free or die” property fanatics will resist any authority that attempts to deny them their perceived right to be a monkey-mom.

Oftentimes it is difficult to believe that all that has transpired is over the possessory interest in an illegal Toronto monkey.  During examination, Sherri Delaney, operator of Story Book Farm Primate Sanctuary (the defendant) discussed the harassment and threats she and the volunteers received via the supporters and followers of Yasmin Nakhuda’s Facebook page.  The phone calls and internet based threats to kill Ms. Delaney and burn down or otherwise destroy the sanctuary came to the forefront of her testimony.  Someone threatened to bring a “piece” to the first day of court and someone else took pics of supporters inside the courthouse and posted them on the internet.  As a direct result of these behaviours, three people were barred from attending the ongoing custody trial, despite the plaintiff asserting that these individuals had done nothing objectionable.

Story Book Farm supporters have always been compliant with regard to courtroom behaviour, but this courtesy has not always been similarly granted to us by some of the supporters for the plaintiff.  Additionally, people who say it’s their automatic constitutional right to be in court have probably been paying a little too much attention to the arguments put forth by property rights enthusiasts in the US who have flocked to support across-the-board monkey ownership in Canada.  When we come to court we have an expectation that we will be safe and our privacy respected.  When people publish photos taken in a courthouse then we certainly feel that our rights have not been respected and our privacy invaded.  You must have respect for the court and all its participants, that includes refraining from publishing or taking pictures inside the courthouse, which absolutely did happen on May31st and it included Ms. Delaney as well as several of her supporters.

Let me paint faces on some of Nakhuda’s supporters who caused this vitriol – these are people who make shit up and maliciously repeat false information that has been disproven in court or is just plan wrong.  Please read comments and accusations made to the supporters in the gallery below.  Fake profiles were used to commit character assassination with impunity.  Hiding behind one such fake profile, Nakhuda supporters uploaded bestiality photos on the sanctuary supporters’ Facebook page.  Others made vindictive accusations designed to bully and undermine the sanctuary.  Other times people supporting the return of Darwin from the sanctuary handed out photocopies criticizing animal advocates to reporters on the court steps. Virtually without fail, the comments on their page and elsewhere on the internet descend into virulency; to the casual reader, lies and truth are difficult to separate.  These are issues that journalists covering the Darwin story haven’t touched upon and were not privy to.

The tension between the two polarized groups was seen in the trial as well,  which is not about who can better care for Darwin, but who rightfully owns him.  At the core of the trial are the issues of whether Darwin is a wild or domestic animal and whether Ms. Nakhuda knowingly surrendered him to Toronto Animal Services.  While Kevin Toyne was considerate and polite in his examinations,  without raising his voice,  Ted Charney addressed Sherri Delaney with disdain,  in a manner that I considered to be rude and presumptive.  Of course some of the DDM supporters take a cue from this and somehow arrive at the conclusion that it’s acceptable behaviour to insult and threaten to pull people’s hair in court.

Plaintiff counsel Charney has maintained that Darwin is not a wild animal as he is wearing a coat and diaper.  Charney’s co-counsel said that Nakhuda did sign a form at animal services surrendering her ownership of Darwin, but the bylaw officers didn’t clearly explain its purpose and she thought she was surrendering the monkey just so they could perform public health tests. It seems incredulous that a real-estate lawyer did not understand that the surrender form she signed was a conveyance of property, which is what Darwin is in this trial – property or chattel.  If she did not understand the context of a “surrender” form, why also did the plaintiff ask to see Darwin at Toronto Animal Services, “one last time?”

In his closing arguments, lawyer for the sanctuary Kevin Toyne stressed that Darwin is a wild animal and, under a doctrine called ferae naturae, can only be owned by the person who possesses him at the time. “The second Darwin got out of the car, Ms. Nakhuda no longer owned him,” he said. Because of the unusual nature of the case, Toyne relied in part on century-old case law, in particular a case of a fox that wandered off its owner’s property and was shot dead by a neighbour. The court determined that the owner lost title to the animal when it left his property,  as Darwin left Nakhuda’s property when he escaped at IKEA. But like “Angry Baby” from the Simpsons,  some of Nakhuda’s supporters whined that Darwin had been stolen, despite being sent to Story Book by Toronto Animal Services,  and being assigned by Justice Brown to stay there until conclusion of the trial.  You need an Allen key (that’s an IKEA joke) to navigate through their “logic.”

Mr. Toyne also pointed out discrepancies in her stories of how she acquired the monkey. Initially, she called Darwin a “gift,” before acknowledging that she paid $5,000 (deep discounted from the original $10,000) to buy him from a mysterious Montreal exotic animal seller. She originally claimed she was looking for a hyacinthe macaw, but was quoted on the internet elsewhere as being enthralled with Japanese macaques after seeing the now infamous  Japanese monkey waiter video.

But who would spend even $5,000  on a pet without a health guarantee and a receipt? Apparently there were no health or vaccination records, and despite this and Darwin’s propensity for nipping and biting, he was still taken “everywhere” including a Quiznos restaurant. In my opinion, these actions, or lack of them, show disregard for the health and safety, not only of Darwin, but of anyone around him.

A recent HuffPo article by PeTA’s Ingrid Newkirk reveals that cyberbullying can result in tragic consequences.  The sanctuary supporters and volunteers deserve support, not cyberbully spite.  I have no problem debating facts, but how to deal with people who respond to facts with personal insults and libel?

If you can’t wait for the South Park episode, read on.  Be advised that some of these posts contain objectionable or even outrageously offensive content. Shit gets real here:

I can think of only one reason why someone would publish another person’s contact information – as an encouragement to harass..

Sorry, but you are wrong on all counts. What a bizarre series of claims – nevertheless one of the main tactics used by the DDM group when confronted with facts.

It would seem like an incredibly immense undertaking that would bring this conspiracy to a whole new level – everyone in Durham is colluding against them?

This screen cap relates to the complaint by Story Book that photos were being taken of us inside the courthouse. Clearly, the persons taking and posting the pics missed the part about “willing participants?”

I apologize for the grossness that is currently burrning your retinas

Nope. The ban occurred as a result of the photo-taking in the courthouse, coming hot on the heels of a threat to bring something apparently prohibited to the courthouse.

This comment made by the DDM Admin (one of several people) is indicative of the overall love and spirituality espoused by the group. /sarcasm

Here’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. Always ensure you have sufficient liability insurance before making statements like this.

Well since you have a library of screen shots, you’ll have no problem proving that Story Book supporters threatened your kids and are in any way associated with violence. Please stop projecting your own personalities on us.

Well this is disturbing! No doubt this poster has spent too much time listening to the property-rights fanatics on the Darling Darwin Monkey page. Story Book supporters are shocked that Darwin has been reduced to a hat. And notice again the recurring theme that we are jealous.

All this hate is bringing strangers together like a neighborhood car fire. And how’d your investigation go? Never heard any more about your “proof.”

The same delusional, defiant self-righteousness in the face of all that remains sane and normal…

An army of monkeys? Sounds kind of obsessive-compulsive to me.

This poster, who is fake, doesn’t get the privilege of anonymity. The post was later deleted as porn. Hard to believe this is happening over a monkey.

Here’s the threat to burn down the sanctuary or otherwise dismantle it “safely.” Yeah, let’s make sure we’re doing our illegal shit “safely.”

She unlocks her jaw to swallow them whole.

Why do you want to know how our kids are? And what’s a “P C E?” A piece? Could this be why you were prevented from entering court? Well that and maybe the threats to pull hair and annoying comments during break and after in the courtroom are what did you in.

The police don’t actually get a hold of IPs without a court order, so this is another trumped-up post without merit.

I’ll be sure to tune in! More entertaining than Mama June and Honey Boo Boo.

It’s no fun if you can’t tell us where they are! But since you have posted them *somewhere*, I’m sure you have no problem with me posting these screen caps.

They are trying to stay on the radar so that they can get their own make believe TV show. We cannot call it a reality show, because they live in a make believe world.

Wow, how unaware can you be? Why then are so many endangered monkeys being stolen from zoos? Why then, cannot Ms. Nakhuda show evidence of the country of origin for Darwin?

And you’ve created this nice little job for yourself haven’t you? This type of meddling in people’s private affairs and attempting to mess with their livelihood is proof that the only way some of the DDM supporters can deal is to try and fight dirty.

The “Secret Service? You are the only act in Toronto that is capable of upstaging the Ford Brothers. Seriously.

You should consider that you’re getting up in years – you are not that far away from slurping tapioca pudding on the lanai at the retirement home.

Please someone, drop a quarter in her styrofoam cup – she’ll need all the donations she can muster for her defense.

Some of the “Merican followers decide to get in on the act and propose “liberating” the Story Book monkeys

Even Dr. Jane Goodall does not escape the occasional drive-by slur….

Can We Regulate Horse Slaughter Into Extinction?

Written by:  Laura Bell (reproduced with permission)

Artwork by: Yahena Pasha

If horse slaughter continues, and if slaughterhouses that slaughter horses re-open in the United States, and to PREVENT taxpayers from paying even ONE PENNY for inspections by the USDA, here is a list of requirements I put together that would close a lot of loopholes for people in the slaughter business so they would NOT be able to continue to operate unethically and illegally.

Might be difficult to enforce, however, if we taxpayers demand that they be followed, perhaps with our majority numbers we could either shut down the horse slaughter industry here in the US (because quite frankly, as a business owner myself, I’m beyond tired of horse slaughter dealers ALWAYS operating outside the law in terms of business licensing, maintaining commercial insurance, getting finger printed and background checked like I have to do, etc–NO MORE FREE RIDES FOR THESE LOSERS!) or we can force them to spend money in order to operate legally and not have we taxpayers be forced to pay for their businesses.

These rules and regulations would also protect horse owners who would never in a million years ship a horse to their horrific death by slaughter from from being forced to abide by the same rules as proposed by the NAIS and other restrictive and controlling agencies our government is trying to force down the throats of ANY horse owners, including those of us who are completely ANTI-HORSE SLAUGHTER, for food chain animals as those who deal directly or indirectly in horse slaughter and are horse slaughter dealers:

1.  Anyone who deals in horse slaughter, be it a breeder, a kill buyer, an owner, a rancher, a transporter, a slaughterhouse owner, a trainer, etc, will have to secure and pay for a Dealer’s License, complete with background checks, finger printing, fee’s, etc. Seriously, when I sold 3 cars and a horse trailer in a month, I was contacted by entities (the county I live in regarding a business license and the taxation board) that said I needed to get a Dealer’s license even though I really was a private party seller. Why shouldn’t people dealing and making a living with horse slaughter have to secure a Dealer’s license, complete with an IRS filing, and have all of their own rules, regulations and requirements separate from the rest of us horse people who don’t deal in slaughter? Also, MANY people involved in horse slaughter are convicted felons, are often on parole, have warrants out on them, have issues with their drivers licenses (suspended, revoked, need an SR-22 filing, etc), so many people will NOT get finger printed and/or have background checks performed because they are afraid they will end up in jail.

2.  Anyone dealing in horse slaughter will be required to carry COMMERCIAL liability business insurance with at least 1 million dollar liability limits, AND will also be required to pay for and carry COMMERCIAL vehicle insurance with the higher limits. MOST of the people involved in slaughter use their regular stock trailers for towing horses around locally (before the horse is shipped to a slaughter facility and usually transported with 10 or more horses), however, if an at-fault accident occurs and their insurance carrier finds out the accident occurred while their vehicles were being used for business/commercial purposes, any claims will be denied/declined by the claims adjuster. I know this because my husband was an insurance broker for 30 years and just buying a horse at the kill sale which will be shipped to slaughter and driving them home in the smaller stock trailer is considered by the insurance company to be business/commercial use of the vehicle if it is investigated and found to be a business the individual is operating using statutory vehicle insurance instead of commercial insurance (rates are A LOT higher for commercial), then the claim will be denied.

3. Because the stakes are a bit higher when it comes to horse slaughter and shipping possibly tainted horse meat and sickening and/or killing people, anyone dealing in horse slaughter will have to carry General Liability Insurance to cover possible claims, and also prosecution for dealing in tainted horse meat.

4. For the breeders (and this includes the ranch breeding programs of which we are seeing 100′s of pregnant mares, open broodmares, young stock, and old ranch horses who can’t “do” anymore sold directly to the feedlot we have been doing weekly rescues from and it is heart breaking and disgusting because we are only offered a few to rescue and the rest ship to slaughter), who regularly “breed and dump” horses at the kill sales and/or ship directly to slaughter, they will be required to microchip and/or freeze or hot brand their horses to be able to identify them when they go to slaughter. When one of their horses goes through, the horse will be held, the breeder will be contacted and will be required to provide an entire record from birth of the horses vaccination records, drug records, dewormer and supplements records, other “additives” records, etc. Every person that has owned that horse between the breeder and when they end up at the slaughterhouse will also be required to provide documentation/records on the horse as well. If these records are not provided, the horse cannot be slaughtered and must be humanely euthanized and disposed of at the sellers’ expense.

5. Also for the breeders, they will have a quota of the number of horses they can produce every year (like what they have in many European countries, where they breed higher quality horses because they are breeding for quality instead of quantity) and if they go over their quota, they will be taxed/fined for every horse over the quota.

6. Anyone dealing in slaughter horses will have their own required Bill of Sale stating that the horse is either free of drugs, vaccines, dewormers, additives, etc, or they are not, and they will be required to sign with copies going to their State, the Buyer, one for them, and a copy goes to the Federal government. This will enable a horses ownership, drug, and additive record to be more precisely traced. And although I do know people are always yapping about “less government”, I’ve also noticed that these same people always want less government when it doesn’t benefit them, but more government when it does. This slaughter Bill of Sale will also differentiate the people who deal in horse slaughter from other horse people who do not, and will keep the anti-horse slaughter people from being subjected to rules, laws and regulations like the NAIS that not only cost us money, but also infringe on our private non-business/non-slaughter ownership of horses when we are not putting any horses into the food chain with drugs and other additives in their systems. Those of us who are in fact anti-horse slaughter should never be targeted just because other horse people choose to deal in horse slaughter.

7. The seller of the horse going to slaughter will also pay an inspection fee at the slaughterhouse so that we taxpayers don’t have to.  Anyone sending a horse to slaughter will be required that THEY pay for a blood test to test for drugs and other “additives” in the horses system, and the horse will be held until the results of the blood test come back. If the horse is found to have drugs or other additives in their system and paperwork has been signed saying they were clean, not only will the seller have to pay for humane euthanasia and disposal of the horses body AT the facility they are at, than the person performing the fraudulent actions will be: *First time offense-fined, *Second offense-fined and suspended from selling horses to slaughter for 1 year, *Third offense-prosecuted as a repeat offender in fraudulent activities, possibly jailed, and their licensing is permanently revoked as a Dealer.

In closing however, if all anti-horse slaughter people banded together and without going on witch hunts began systematically finding out who the SUPPLIERS are that are selling horses by the trailer loads at kill sales, directly to feedlots, and often taking the horses directly to the slaughterhouse (which will happen a lot if horse slaughter houses are re-opened in the United States) and PUBLICIZE who the CHEATERS are who use horse slaughter as their very own FREE disposal system, then the OPPORTUNISTS like De Los Santos would NOT have nearly enough horses to slaughter and make a profit from.

As long as we have SUPPLIERS of horses into the slaughter pipeline, there will ALWAYS be OPPORTUNISTS to take advantage of the SUPPLY of horses, mules and donkeys that will make their money off of them being slaughtered. If we stop the major supply and flow of horses, mules and donkeys into the slaughter pipeline, then the OPPORTUNISTS would not make enough money to warrant staying in business and they would find opportunities elsewhere.

MANY of the people that dump horses for FREE at kill sales, feedlots and slaughterhouses DO NOT want anyone to know who they are, where they live, etc, so targeting them for exposure to their friends, family, business associates at their “real jobs” and also business associates in the horse world in horse racing, showing in many events (including high dollar hunter/jumpers AND dressage too), other breeders, trainers, owners, etc, who are anti-horse slaughter and who actually behave responsibly and don’t breed too many and also have the horses that can’t “do” anymore humanely euthanized, etc. would force MANY of them to stop supplying horses into the slaughter pipeline because they REALLY DO NOT WANT people to know who they are and what they are doing (cheating in a horrific way)…..sure, a lot of people have put together lists of who the kill buyers are, however, the kill buyers are OPPORTUNISTS and most simply don’t care if people know they are kill buyers.
But the SUPPLIERS? MOST of them do NOT want people to know who they are and that they dispose of horses to slaughter for FREE like the cheaters they are……THAT would ruin the public image for many of them (the ones who run in the upper class circles who have money and would not want someone to turn to them at a dinner party and say “I hope it’s not true, but I heard you dispose of your horses to slaughter which is very inhumane and cruel, is it really true you do that?” Now THAT would be a priceless series of videos to take and post on YouTube when the suppliers are asked questions like that!)

If it was actually added up how much the SUPPLIERS are SAVING when they DO NOT pay for humane euthanasia AND disposal of the horses body and instead PAY NOTHING by selling to the feedlots and kill sales and actually are PAID for their horse by-the-pound which varies depending on the area of the country but are still them receiving money, I think that not only would people be astonished by who much these cheaters save, but I KNOW that if the suppliers were exposed and stopped doing what they’re doing instead of getting our government to go along with THEM and force the rest of us horse owners to abide by rules set forth by agencies like the NAIS that have nothing to do with we ANTI-slaughter horse people, there would NOT be enough horses supplied for the opportunists to stay in business.

Laura Bell
http://www.thestarlightsanctuary.org
http://www.starwoodfarm.com

Survey Results Reveal That Traceability Does Little to Alleviate Concerns About Horsemeat……

 

Written by Heather Clemenceau

First of all, thanks to everyone for completing the survey I launched in a previous blog,  and for sharing your opinions.  In this survey I don’t claim to provide options for pro-slaughters to render an opinion here, as most people following this blog are vehemently opposed to horse slaughter.  So the questions are mostly open and non-leading, but only if you’re of the anti-slaughter sentiment!

After numerous missed deadlines or the complete absence of functional plans and infrastructure,  we have about two months to go in Canada before we find out what happens with equine traceability.  We know Ag-Canada and Equine Canada won’t be ready, but what will the EU do about it?  They are well aware that the Canadian slaughter system  is  unreliable, dangerous to the global food supply and one to avoid emulating should the U.S. resume slaughtering horses for human consumption, as is being proposed. If the EU decides to continue with the status quo, they are no doubt aware that the EID does not prevent adulterated meat from reaching the consumer. It can’t, because the document doesn’t guarantee anything.   It’s also become more obvious to Canadians that the CFIA is populated with many veterinarians who are quick to respond to news articles to defend food safety practices – but unless they are trained in public health and willing to put public health front and centre, they should refrain from providing false assurances of safety or meddling in food processing operations.  This is certainly true for Dr. Ian Alexander,  who has an Honours B. Sc. degree in Biology and an M. Sc and Ph.D in Veterinary Pharmacology/Toxicology as well as a Doctorate of Veterinary of Medicine from the University of Guelph – but – apparently no public health experiences or epidemiological course of study. It’s absolutely astounding to me that with his education he can blithely dismiss the CFIA testing protocols for horsemeat as remotely accurate.

Traceability is “the ability to systematically identify a unit of production, track its location and describe any treatments or transformations at all stages of production,  processing and distribution.”  (Archipelago, 2005)

A takeaway from the food fraud/mislabelling scandal in the EU tells us that no amount of tracking without DNA species analysis at critical junctures would have prevented this fraud.  If all these big chains with their food-safety-is-first traceability schemes don’t know what’s in the products they’re hawking, how are mere mortals and consumers to know?

Journalist Liz Brown has researched equine traceability for Horse-Canada. Please click on the graphic to embiggen and read the entire article as a PDF.

The concerns with EU horsemeat scandal  and the North American experience have been reflected in the survey.  While 43.9% of the respondents believed that disease-tracking would be an important outcome of such a system,  66.7% of those same individuals would not voluntarily opt-in to a program.  Perhaps related to an earlier statement from Slaughterhouse Sue Wallis regarding slaughterhouses providing 72 hours to claim (and pay associated costs for) a stolen horse  from a plant,  63.2% of those surveyed do not believe a tracking program would significantly prevent horse theft.   I don’t believe attitudes towards traceability for horses result only from cost or other confounding elements of the program, but from past experience with and knowledge of players in the horse slaughter industry itself.  Traceability will do nothing to make slaughter humane,  assure them  food, water, or rest in crowded trucks in which they are often seriously injured or killed in transit.

Recent high profile food recalls and enhanced consumer awareness have made traceability a high level issue across the supply chain, from manufacturer to consumer. Even though I have a philosophical objection to it,  journalist Liz Brown has written extensively about the inevitability of  traceability in Canada – her research on the program is available by clicking on the article to the left.

Further reading:

Star Investigation:  Ottawa refuses to say whether drug-tainted horsemeat entered food chain

Star Investigation:  Drugged horses slipping through inadequate food system

Saving Holly:  Destined for dinner tables,  Star joins race to rescue drug-filled mare from slaughter