Monthly Archives: September 2013

Counting Our Blessings at Blessfest Canada

Standard

Noahs_Ark

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

The special custom called the Blessing of the Animals is conducted in remembrance of St. Francis of Assisi’s love for all animals.  St. Francis, whose feast day is October 4th, wrote a “Canticle of the Creatures,” an ode to all living things. A procession of animals – dogs, rabbits, and even donkeys, arrived at Fairy Lake Park in Newmarket, Ontario, for this special blessing ceremony,  which was officiated by Father Gordon Sheppard of St. Paul’s Anglican Church in Newmarket,  and Father Daniel Graves,  of Trinity Anglican Church in Bradford.

The bond between people and their pets is like no other relationship.  No wonder pets enjoy the opportunity to take their people to the park for a special blessing!

DSC_1386Looking at BlessFest Canada’s website it’s easy to see that this event is rapidly gaining in popularity.  In 2012, 80 pets were blessed, and on Saturday, September 14th, 114 pets brought their people to the park for the blessing, receiving sparkly silver halos afterwards.  Additionally there were vendors present who provide services such as pet spas, sitting, walking, finding lost pets, a pet memorial service, pet clothing and accessories, and various breed rescues (and a donkey sanctuary), etc.  There were lots of free samples, bling bags for the first 200 and just about everything you need if you are a pet owner and animal lover. My dog Coco, rescued during a puppy-mill raid in Quebec, was  blessed at the park by Father Sheppard, and all of the pets were on their best behaviour, with no accidents and (almost) no barking.  Well, a few dogs decided to bark at the leashed ferrets walking through the park.

Several of my friends ask me why, as an atheist,  would I be interested in attending an animal blessing?  To me, the answer is straightforward – I think such events are extremely positive when they acknowledge that animals have consciousness, or “souls.” The more we learn about animals from science, the more we can see that animals are not that much different from us. In fact, I dare say that they are better than us in many ways. The blessing also reinforces the knowledge that our close interaction with animals means we have a responsibility to protect their welfare.

While it might not sound like much to us to acknowledge that non-human animals possess souls,  or conscious states, the body of scientific evidence is increasingly showing that most animals are conscious in the same way that we DSC_1384are, and it’s no longer something we can ignore. A universal declaration on animal welfare (UDAW) would recognize among people of all nations that animals are sentient – they can suffer and feel pain.  Animal welfare needs to be respected and animal cruelty must end.  The World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) hopes that a universal declaration will encourage governments to make and enforce laws that benefit animals, as well as laws that help people and protect the environment. The world’s toughest challenges – food security, poverty, climate change – can only be solved when the humane treatment of animals are a critical part of the solution.

In addition, an international group of prominent scientists has signed The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness in which they are proclaiming their support for the idea that animals are conscious and aware to the degree that humans are. The group consists of cognitive scientists, neuropharmacologists, neurophysiologists, neuroanatomists, and computational neuroscientists — all of whom have attended the Francis Crick Memorial Conference on Consciousness in Human and Non-Human Animals. The group acknowledges that consciousness can emerge in those animals that are very much unlike humans, including those that evolved along different evolutionary tracks. Consequently, say the signatories, the scientific evidence is increasingly indicating that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness.

DSC_1396“The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states,” they write, “Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors.”

All around the world, millions of people look to animals for companionship; the human-animal bond has proven therapeutic benefits. I think that animals have come a long way in the church in recent decades;  religious people have historically been told that animals do not have souls and, therefore, were not worthy of special attention and could not go to heaven,  which most of us pet lovers refer to as the “Rainbow Bridge.”  I prefer the view of the humourist Will Rogers, who is widely quoted as saying, “If there are no dogs in heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Advertisements

Inherit The Monkey………

Standard

Statue-justice-e1367776167417Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

Today,  many supporters of Story Book Farm Primary Sanctuary were feeling about as nervous as a bunch of long-tailed monkeys in a room full of rocking chairs!  Today,  at 10am,  Justice Mary Vallee dismissed the case stipulating that Darwin would remain at Story Book.  While the case of Nakhuda v. Story Book Farm Primate Sanctuary will not exactly fade away anytime soon,  at least the lives that were on hold while waiting for the trial and the verdict will now be freer to move forward.  And despite it being Friday the 13th,  the day turned out to be a very lucky one for Darwin the IKEA monkey.  For one thing,  he now won’t have to have his canine teeth removed.  He’ll also be free to socialize with other monkeys,  now that the risk of him being returned to Yasmin Nakhuda is gone.  Up until this point,  introducing him to other monkeys would be considered risky,  since he could potentially lose that friendship if he had to leave the sanctuary.

Now that he is completely free to be socialized with other Story Book monkeys, he can begin to experience the emotional development that would not have been available to him in a home environment.   While life in a sanctuary cannot possibly replicate the ideal conditions in nature,  he will now be able to live as much like a monkey as possible.

You can read Justice Vallee’s reasons for the judgment below:

However,  in the land of revenge and retribution where the mob rules,  the Truth is still buried under conspiracy theories of judicial, police,  and even animal control corruption.  Some time ago,  I read the following commentary  about hate messages, written by Paul Watson,  and thought how relevant it was to the Darwin case.  Story Book proprietor Sherri Delaney, her family, volunteers,  and supporters have experienced all manner of disparaging harassment,  which continues even as the verdict was announced.

There are, it seems to me, two sources of this conflict. One is just ideological differences – some people feel that everyone has the right to own a monkey,  while others maintain that monkeys are best left to their own devices in

The Scopes Monkey trial is perhaps best known today for serving as the inspiration for the play, Inherit the Wind, and the movie of the same title.

The Scopes Monkey trial is perhaps best known today for serving as the inspiration for the play, Inherit the Wind, and the movie of the same title.

their natural element. If you’ve read the recent exchanges between Story Book supporters and Nakhuda supporters, these differences become apparent.

A second source of conflict are those who have chosen regular harassment via social media as their chosen mechanism of activism. Threats to take Darwin back from the sanctuary by “alternative means”  and grossly offensive language have been hurled against Story Book supporters on a regular basis.   The result has been to raise the level of emotion and defensiveness for everyone.  Now that the trial is over,  we have to find ways to marginalize and ignore these elements.

Paul Watson is best known one of the most determined, most active and most effective defender of wildlife. For 35 years, Captain Watson was at the helm of the world’s most active marine non-profit organization – the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.   He has a way of dealing with hateful messages that everyone on both sides of the trial can learn from.

Paul Watson~On Dealing With Hate Messages

“Every day I receive a dozen or so nasty messages, most of them simply irrational hate messages, the usual and predictable rambling on about trivial inanities, tossing insults like they actually think such silliness is going to cause me trauma or something.

What they don’t understand is that I appreciate receiving their spiteful messages because I have always been of the opinion that the only people who are never criticized are people who do essentially nothing.

Activism invites criticism, ridicule, hate messages, and threats. Open your mouth and people will disagree with you. A few however feel compelled to dress up their disagreement with ad hominen attacks, insults and threats. Some people just cannot stand the fact that other people do not think the same way they do or believe in the same thing they do.

I have absolutely no emotional reaction to insults or hate messages. Insults from people I do not know are meaningless. In many cases they are simply amusing.

Facebook and other social network site have given rise to the craven types who lash out from the safety of obscurity. They feel they can say whatever they like to whomever they like because no one can see them (well, except for the NSA).

021016-627-xVery few of these people would have the courage to make such insults to your face. Their motivation is their cowardice. All trolls are cowards, that IS their one defining characteristic.

And as cowards they are hardly deserving of respect or even recognition.

Each day I delete a few silly comments and often as not ban a few haters. In fact I appreciate their verbal attacks as a means to identify them so that I can toss them into the trash heap of banned individuals.

I never respond to them because they are not worth responding to.

Now if they don’t bother me you might ask than why am I even bothering to write about this.

The reason is this. I hear from many people, especially younger people about how hurtful these comments can be and how they are bullied by people attacking them on their facebook pages or in comments about articles they write or messages they post.

I do tell people to simply ignore such things but despite this many people feel personally victimized.

So my advice to people in this situation is to realize that if you ever wish to achieve anything in life you must understand that whatever you do, there will be people who disagree with you and some of these people have so little personal integrity that they will respond in a manner they believe will be intentionally hurtful.

You should instead view such attacks as a validation that you have said something meaningful. Nothing makes these hate posters (often called trolls) more angry than the realization that someone is articulating a belief that they disagree with.

And nothing frustrates them more than when they are ignored. They want to see your pain. They want to know that they poked you and it hurt. Don’t give them the satisfaction.

Block them, delete them and ignore them.

If they insult you for your physical appearance, ignore them. If they accuse you of being stupid, ignore them. If they insult others you respect and love, ignore them.

They are like mosquitos buzzing in your ear. Annoying yes, but toss a mosquito net over your tent and suddenly that irritating buzz has gone away.

I receive thousands of insults every year. They are as meaningless as bug splatter on your windshield. With your car you turn on your windshield washer and with the internet you click on the ban option and delete button.

Darwin at Story Book

Darwin at Story Book

I have known very attractive people who have allowed them self to be hurt by unknown persons calling them ugly. The true ugliness lies inside of the mind hurtling the insults. I have known very intelligent people who have been hurt by unknown persons calling them stupid or ignorant. True stupidity and ignorance lies in the motivation of the trolls seeking to hurt them.

We are who we are, we are not here in this life to fit into the definition of what is acceptable by other people.

People I have known have said to me, “but they are lying about me, what will other people think?

Yes, people lie about other people and this may or may not influence how other people think. The point is it does not matter. The internet is full of lies. Anyone who has a Wikipedia page about them knows that. The media is full of lies as anyone who has had a story written about them knows quite well.

It simply does not matter.

What does matter is that you have faith in yourself and those you know, love and respect personally. What an unknown person says about you is simply of no consequence and if people you know are gossiping about you, well accept it, people like to gossip.

Someone told me, “but people are talking about me.”

As Oscar Wilde once remarked, “the only thing worst than being talked about is not being talked about.”

Let them talk, it validates your existence. They are talking about you because they 1. Admire you. 2. Respect you. 3. Envy you. 5. They are intimidated by you. 6. They irrationally hate you. Or 7. They are simply nuts. (the nut barrel is certainly full on facebook.)

I am in a special category. I have entire facebook pages, websites and you tube sites dedicated to insulting and attacking me. People are actually paid by the Institute of Cetacean Research to insult me online. Personally I feel kind of flattered and amused. They put so much energy into it that I have not had the heart to tell them I simply find their obsession kind of silly. If they actually believe they are having an emotional impact on me, well maybe it’s best to let them continue to believe that, it gives them an outlet for their need to insult and hate and I the case of the professional haters employed by the ICR, I guess it provides jobs to the skillfully challenged.

Three monkeysBut the bottom line here is this: Never give any credibility to anything said about you or to you on the internet. People you do not know have zero credibility. They are like poison ivy or poison oak. If you brush up against them it will affect you but if you stay way the problem never develops.

I know it can be difficult if you are young and have self-doubts or if you are struggling with issues like self esteem. But remember, the only person you need to impress is yourself. If Albert Einstein had listened to his critics he would never have discovered relativity. Even his teachers told him he had no aptitude for mathematics. For most of his entire adult life Nelson Mandela was called a violent terrorist, now he is an icon of peace. He refused to let the opinions of others change his heart or mind.

Hurtful, insulting and vicious things were said to Martin Luther King yet he let them slide away like water off a duck’s back. He was above that and so should we all be above that.

No one controls your destiny but yourself. When you focus your eyes on where you wish to go and follow the path outlined by the passion of your heart you can simply steer around any obstacles in your path.

The internet especially Facebook is a minefield of hate. Step around the mines and pursue your dreams and your goals.”

Animal Activist Do’s and Don’ts – A Code of Conduct For Protests

Standard

Amberlea with clover for her horseWritten by:  Heather Clemenceau

Artwork by:  Heather Clemenceau

I think that many people hear the term “Code of Conduct” and think that they are automatically about to be thrown in a straitjacket of do-goodiness.  But a Code of Conduct is really just an itemization of our ethics – it sets the tone from the top down, on what our culture of protest, use of social media, etc. will be.  When the Code is understood by activists, it protects us from our own occasional tendency to want to behave roguishly, and it shows people who are watching and listening to us that we have lines that we just won’t cross,  no matter what others do.

I believe that protests should have principles that govern us.  So I’m drawing on my own experience in the Corporate world as well as the activist world in itemizing what I think are important facets of an activist Code of Conduct:

  • We stand for non-violent protection of animals.  Peaceful protest is honourable protest.
  • Keep the protest passive and try to avoid individuals who are overtly negative.  If they insist on arguing with us, stick to the facts.  Do not use inflammatory language or insults when pointing out your legal position and your right to protest
  • What are my rights and freedoms as a photographer in Ontario?  Here is an excellent resource that explains what can be photographed,  who owns a photo,  and what can be published – Ontario Photographers Rights.
  • Do not endanger yourself or others.  If you put yourself into a situation,  then someone else must either come looking for you or must assist or rescue you,  which also puts them at risk.
  • Stand on public property.  Stand where the police tell you and make note of their badge number if the request is questionable.  If a property owner insists that you stand somewhere else, be cautious,  since the police are the ones who must enforce trespassing laws.
  • Do Use the services of the local SPCA and other agencies that advocate for animals  – they can often help raise awareness of the issues or of future protests.  Ask them to include the dates of future protests in email blasts or newsletters.
  • Do not be defamatory – do not make claims about a person’s reputation or business that may be damaging and untrue.Killer Whales (2)
  • We will always make certain that we are parking on public property.  Please do not park on private property and then proceed to protest against the person or organization upon whose property you just trespassed.
  • Do not be threatening, abusive,  harassing,  and do not invade anyone’s personal privacy.
  • Do not make sexist, racist, profane, homophobic, or otherwise offensive and discriminatory remarks
  • Do not promote violence or other unlawful acts including trespassing.
  • Call the police if someone commits an offence against you so that documentation exists.
  • Obey the law and the police. The Animal Welfare/Rights movement is one that is increasingly intersecting with traditional areas of law such as tort, criminal, property, and constitutional law.  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is entrenched in Canada’s constitution, guarantees freedom of peaceful assembly in section 2(c).
  • We must be responsible and accountable for our actions, intended or unintended.
  • We don’t condone wrongdoing in ourselves and will be responsible and speak up when it occurs.
  • Do create petitions,  use photographs and factual information to support the petition.  Rely on crowdsourcing to route your petition.  Do find a way to occasionally send a message to the people who have signed your petition to keep them up to date on the progress of your cause.
  • We won’t abuse alcohol or drugs.
  • Contact the police ahead of the protest.  Ask if permits are required.  If so,  ensure that they are fully complied with.
  • If we see violence or vandalism occur, we will report it and co-operate with authorities if required.when pigs fly
  • Know thy audience.  Familiarize yourself with the goal of the protest.  If you create your own signage,  make sure that it aligns with these goals.  Some groups are not susceptible to certain message points,  which means your time and effort protesting will be minimalized or lost entirely.
  • If we use a megaphone, we will ensure that its use is sporadic rather than constant.  We will observe all local bylaws regarding megaphone use.  We will ensure that megaphones are not used excessively in residential areas and we will always use it to convey factual information.  We will not use a megaphone if it startles flight animals.
  • We will respect the rights of non-violence and compassion.
  • We will leave no garbage behind.
  • We will always present ourselves as ordinary, everyday citizens, (which we are).  We have justifiable concerns.  We must also develop and sustain a sense of practicality and realism when responding to questions and concerns.
  • Select an issue that is of particular concern to you and run a campaign to foster change within your local community, workplace or university, or on a larger scale.
  • Video Documentation should be used with a view to preserving evidence and documenting our performance.  Video recording at demos and other events can be a critically useful tool in helping us to review and improve upon our effectiveness. It can also serve as a deterrent to intimidating or violent behavior to our opponents in addition to recourse to be used in litigation. Video recording, however, may unintentionally inflame passions or be viewed as an tool of intimidation if not handled correctly. In view of this it is essential that recording demos and events be done so in a professional manner that avoids aggressive behavior and avoids as much as possible verbal exchanges. (Thanks for this suggestion Martin)

Girl chasing sheepFor a long time it was left to philosophers to speak up in defence of animals.  For example,  Pythagoras urged respect for animals. In the 17th century, early animal protection laws were advanced by Locke, Rousseau, Bentham,  John Stuart Mill et al,  and followed eventually Henry Berg,  who founded the ASPCA.  What we hold in common with the philosophers is that we can advance animal issues by using critical reasoning,  the most effective strategy.

The way has not been easy for contemporary animal activists and will perhaps get even more difficult. The animal exploitation industries have huge resources behind them, and have the ear of government,  But it is impossible to believe that, in the end, justice and compassion will not triumph.

“The question is not can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But can they suffer?”

Space Migration with blue energy field

Slaughterhouse Sue Asks Supporters to Slaughter Horses for IEBA War Chest

Standard

cowboy-on-horseback

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

Slaughterhouse Sue Wallis is busier than a one-armed paper hanger these days – asking for “donations” to be made to her for-profit company so that the hauling of horses can continue.  Our favourite slaughterphile hopes to build her “war chest” by attempting to “crowdsource” funding from some of the cheapest people on the planet – people who would sell their horse to a slaughterhouse rather than providing humane euthanasia.  Sue really throws her hyperbole engine into high gear when she says thatWe take “bare bones” to a high art form.

In a Constant Contact massmail designed to spam everyone with her tales of woe, Sue writes:

As we edge towards a return of humane and regulated horse processing here in the United States, the hysterics and abusive bullying tactics–not to mention outright domestic terrorism in the destruction of property and threats 1184823_499213163504366_582353102_nto families–of the radical animal rights groups funded and driven by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) gets worse and worse.

Now much of the struggle has been hauled into the courts, litigation being a favored and especially lucrative activity of HSUS wherein they are able to fund their nefarious activities with deceptively raised dollars and way too much taxpayer money.

The cost of intervening in these lawsuits on behalf of the horse industry is shooting up astronomically!

Thank goodness, we are working with teams of dedicated attorneys who are providing more free and reduced services than most would ever expect. They have my undying respect and gratitude, and I’ll bet yours, too.

Nonetheless, we must fill up our war chest to have any hope of success. To do this the IEBA Board of Directors and I have developed a multi-pronged fundraising campaign that starts TODAY with your help.”

If you read the rest of this communication, you’ll see a lot of words and phrases not normally associated with Sue Wallis.  Terms such as:

Innovative

Cutting Edge

Potential to add value

Convenience

Humane

Scientifically Sound

Rigorously Enforced

Highest Quality

Verified Safe

Pure Products

Wallis’ latest pitch is that she wants slaughterphiles to tick off some box at the sale barn, which will designate the proceeds of the sale of a horse to the International Equine Business Association (IEBA).  So, true to form, she’s asking for blood money to seed a for-profit business to commercialize and exploit horses.   We know she has at least $183 in the war chest pot, donated by a supporter who sent a perfectly healthy but arthritic horse to slaughter. So she plans to go up against HSUS with donations accumulated from the suffering of horses sent to slaughter.  By soliciting gifts,  Wallis’ is essentially panhandling,  something she claims horse rescues do,  except she is doing it without the actual rescue aspect.  So many United Horsemen’s members are critical of any and all rescues simply because they ask for donations – how is this different?

Shady Lady Ranch I think Wallis recognizes that she’s not going to get the big donations via this stream,  so she’s come up with some combo golf/clay pigeon shooting event she has named the “Rope, Stroke, and Poke.”  I think there’s a “choke” option in there too, which makes me think that Sue missed her calling – instead of writing poetry she should be writing ad copy for the Shady Lady Ranch in Nevada.  I’ve read her poetry,  and I can honestly say she’s about as good at poetry as I am at pole-vaulting.

Unlike some of the other dubious, multiple versions of her grassroots horse slaughter enterprise, this one is a business, so whatever is donated must be declared as income, and sadly, no income tax receipts will be provided for any horses slaughtered for the IEBA.  Indeed, the IRS would qualify the contributions of money gleaned from slaughtered horses as gifts rather than donations.

Following is the IRS publication 526 that discusses Charitable Contributions:

  • There is certainly no law against a for-profit business owner asking anybody to provide a gift or grant to the business without the expectation of returning the item. A person can ask a relative to “donate” money to keep a business afloat, or attempt to raise supporting gifts of materials or cash in a variety of ways. Also, some private and public entities provide for-profits with taxable business grants that are, technically, donations.
  • However, the word “donation” does have a common usage as a specialized term. Nonprofits ask for donations to support a cause and have special status with the IRS that makes those donations tax-deductible. A for-profit business that accepts a donation would not be able to provide the same tax-deductible benefit.
  • While it is the case that a for-profit business can accept donations, it has to be careful not to run afoul of a state’s laws against soliciting the public for donations without registering with the state attorney general. If a for-profit business is asking for “donations,” it has to at least make it clear that the business is not a nonprofit.

As a for-profit business, the IEBA claims that it offers various services, including such services as legal resources for those “persecuted” by anti-slaughter advocates, otherwise known as “terrorists” in Wallis parlance.  Along with the other “services” the IEBA will provide to members is “crisis mitigation and reputation management.”   I might suggest to Sue Wallis that perhaps she should join people like Mel Gibson and Lindsay Lohan, and employ the services of a good reputation management firm, because she needs some real “black hat” techniques to clean herself up online – the Sue Wallis brand is a lightening rod for bad publicity….

When this organization flops, there’ll be another new organization all loaded with the requisite donate buttons.  The deception here happens when you have all these different groups,  such as United Horsemen,  United Horsemen’s Front,  Unified Equine,  United Organizations of the Horse,  and now the IEBA all producing the same drivel that is “substantiated” by each.  It gives a false impression of credibility that does not exist except when you have multiple entities all supporting each other all over the interwebs.

Wallis has in fact made has made the commercial exploitation and slaughter of horses one of her number one goals in all she publishes, says and does.  Horse slaughter is all she ever writes about, with the only exception being 155the selling of shares of cows for the purchase of unpasteurized milk.  How is it that a politician, who seems to spend every waking moment lobbying to change laws that will benefit her financially, doesn’t incur and ethics investigation.  Isn’t using one’s privileged position as an elected official for their own benefit, an ethical violation?  Or does no one really care about ethics in Wyoming?

Wallis has always claimed that United Horsemen had no money.  Apparently no one in the horse business or ranching business has any money.  The official story about their infamous truck raffle was that it didn’t make any money either.

Wallis claimed that only 302 tickets had been sold. Then,  about a year after the original tickets had been sold, a truck had yet to be awarded and an announcement from Sue Wallis stated that (still) only 302 tickets had been sold, that the drawing would be in January (2011) and that tickets were still available. The description of the truck, however, was given as a plain vehicle having a retail price of $11,000 less than the original ticket purchasers had been told would be awarded. According to the prosecutor, Campbell County Attorney Jeani Stone, money from the raffle was turned over to “organizers,” that Wallis did not personally benefit, and that the truck was given away. But Wallis was the primary organizer, and she was the Vice President of United Horsemen, the organization holding the raffle. Is Stone suggesting that Wallis did receive the money from the raffle? Stone also announced there were 147 raffle tickets sold. But Wallis said 302 were sold. What happened to the other 155 tickets? That is at least $15,500 unaccounted for.  Anyway, it seems that the fiasco that ensued from the truck raffle was totally swept under the carpet.

pants-on-fireI’ve seen agricultural sites asking their readers to send Wallis cheques, and she has reportedly received donations from Big Ag as well as cattlemen’s organizations.  But you have to wonder how many large donations she would have received from these groups, since she doesn’t have any investors or a business plan.  But all of this is artfully dodged whenever she describes the achievements of any of her organizations.  We read online as she described renovations being done on the Rockville Missouri meat plant to convert it to a horse slaughter facility.  This was a plant that she didn’t even have title to and could not even purchase if she had the money, as ownership was tied up in litigation.

Obviously, the Wyoming State Rep is spending too much time downwind of cattle farts….

It’s highly doubtful that Chevideco is interested in investing in her business schemes, since they’ve always said they wanted a turnkey operation, and they made this evident at Mountain Grove Missouri, which they toured with Wallis.  Beyond the ethical question, the townspeople definitely didn’t like the idea of a foreign company coming into their town to kill 400 horses a day and send butt roasts and briskets back to Europe or wherever.

Dave Duquette’s proposed $3 million “restoration” facility,  that would apparently employ 30-40 college students and an indoor,  equine-assisted therapy centre for handicapped individuals is suspect as well.  If it actually happened,  they’d basically be doing what rescues accomplish, which in theory is great,  but the idea of a rehab and slaughter facility on the same site?  “Sorry dear,  you won’t be able to ride Sassy anymore.  We processed him into burgers yesterday.”  Very therapeutic.

Wallis and Dave Duquette’s “restoration” program for horses entering the slaughterhouse stream is,  IMO, more likely to be a way for them to claim that horses that are already slaughtered are alive on their tax returns and itemized as expenses. Think about it – who is going to be auditing them at any time to determine that all these horses that they are supposedly rehabbing are actually alive?  It’s rather like claiming an income tax deduction or exemption for dependents that you don’t actually possess!

And according to the company’s own literature, the plant would not be for old or sick horses. “Abused, abandoned, neglected and starving horses will be made healthy prior to processing,”  So that phrase puts the lie to the claim that slaughter is needed for old and sick horses.  It’s been a while since we’ve heard about the “Do Not Slaughter” registry.  But Wallis has said herself that If your horse did turn up at one of their proposed plants (and they can find the entry in their Excel spreadsheet) you have two or three days to pick the horse up,  AND pay their costs.  Nowhere have I ever heard of someone having to pay to retrieve stolen property.

Ever wonder why you can’t find Wallis’ charities on Guidestar?  I’ve looked for them.  As a non-profit, they must provide full public disclosure…… And since a 503(c) is not allowed to conduct political

Sue Wallis and Dave Duquette use this pic of a dead Spanish horse in their printed propaganda claiming it was a horse that American Advocates had starved?

Sue Wallis and Dave Duquette used this pic of a dead Spanish horse in their printed propaganda claiming it was a horse that American Advocates had starved?

lobbying, perhaps a review with the IRS should be undertaken.  Having said all that, you must have the same impression that I do –  that even Wallis’ non-profits are intended to be a profit centre for her.

Horse meat is the only meat product (and I use that term loosely) that is being produced by non-farmers collecting salvage animals from questionable/undocumented environments with untraceable histories.  Nevertheless, it seems that Sue Wallis conducted a marketing survey and found a whole 350 people in the entire United States who were interested in eating horsemeat from undocumented animals:

Awhile back we did a marketing survey and about 350 of you from all walks of life and all across the country responded to say that you were interested in purchasing cheval (horse meat)”  She found a whole 350 people upon whom to base her entire business model.  Oh and If you would be willing to sign an affidavit that says you would like to buy and use “cheval,” please email her so that she can send you the paperwork to include your name on a joint statement.

Sue gets a geography lesson here from a Facebook followers.

Sue gets a geography lesson here from a Facebook follower.

Really odd approach.  Sounds like something you would be doing in order to qualify to become a medical marijuana recipient.  She needn’t bother – finding only 350 people who might eat your product is hardly worth the effort.  That’s not even a niche market,  Sue.

In fact, instead of panhandling online, I think Wallis should “crowdsource” a little business acumen and perhaps turn her eyes to becoming a medical marijuana farm rather than spamming everyone with her tales of woe, and trying to sell shares of horses and cows.  I’m sure medical marijuana would grow quite well in Wyoming.  People will actually want to give you money for that, Sue.

John Holland, of the Equine Welfare Alliance wrote that “One survival strategy of prey animals is to synchronize their birthing so as to overwhelm their predators. Sue has adopted this strategy with her spontaneously created facts. She spews so many at one time that at least a few have a good chance to get past us unchallenged.”

And shame on anyone who sends a horse to slaughter and donates the money to this unscrupulous organization. If you can afford to donate a few hundred bucks to Sue Wallis,  you can afford humane euthanasia for your horse.  That’s all.