Live Horse Export FOIA Reveals Frustration, Obfuscation of Facts

Part of the re-election campaign Prime Minister Trudeau included a commitment to ending the trade of horses for the production of horsemeat for export. The 2021 Mandate Letter to then-Minister Bibeau stipulated that she be committed to fulfilling this ban, but she failed to execute the ministerial mandate letter. The government has acknowledged that it has been stung by criticism for its inaction on this mandate. The lack of fulfilment has since been identified as a trade irritant (any issue or policy that creates tension or friction in international trade relations between countries) between the EU and Canada through a little-known mechanism of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).

Further embarrassment for the Liberals continued – in December of 2022, the Globe and Mail published an article that highlighted the inaction by the government in fulfilling this election promise, while underscoring calls for action by public figures. Another such piece the Globe and Mail published further condemned the practice and called for the realization of this campaign promise. The failure to implement this commitment was interpreted by the federal government as a future issue in the next election cycle.

For more than two years, the Government of Canada has been reviewing (at a glacial pace) the legal and policy framework to address the Liberal mandate to ban the live export of horses for slaughter. Unfortunately, much of this 1,200+ page series of FOIA documents has highlighted the degree of obstruction due to the complexities and inefficiencies of bureaucratic systems within government agencies. Disappointingly, an entire team from the CFIA/AAFC/Legal Services, and Canadian Border Services Agency crafted the typical self-congratulatory response letter we’re all too familiar with, about the CFIA maintaining high standards, The Health of Animals Act (HAR) ensuing humane transport, variations of which was sent to Japanese agencies.

Health of Animals regulations are the absolute minimal standards for shipping an animal. The HAR does not ensure humane treatment. Politicians are shocked to discover that competitive horses are shipped with food and water, often in a single compartment, sometimes with their own dedicated veterinarian who travels with them through to their designated stop.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada also endorsed and disseminated misleading information from pro-slaughter individuals and organizations that has been debunked more than a decade ago. One wonders why so much effort has gone into this analysis when the trade largely benefits only a few individuals, and the government’s own legal analysts have stated that the process to end trade seems reasonably straightforward and a decision not necessarily requiring bilateral agreement:

“Article 12.1 of the WTO agreement on agriculture provides that a member must notify in writing and in advance of implementing an export restriction or prohibition, as well as consult with another Member that has a substantial interest as an importer (e.g. Japan) that requests it.  The notification is the include the rationale and duration of the measure.”

Excessive redaction of the most important information in this FOIA will raise questions about transparency and accountability. Notable redactions include the certification process to export horses, any information about the exporters themselves, and perhaps most importantly, Japanese response to the prospect of ending the trade.  There have been some Japanese media reports about reports made in Canadian and UK media regarding the concerns over transportation of these animals but there is no Japanese opinion provided anywhere.

History of Trade Relations with Japan:

• Japan is the fifth largest importer of agri-food and seafood products in the world, and Canada’s third largest market for agri-food and seafood.

• Horse meat is a traditionally eaten food in Japan. In particular, in Kumamoto Prefecture where horse meat is considered a centre of local cuisine that has been part of the culture for over 400, consumption is focused on fresh horse meat. MAFF promotes horse meat as a low-fat, low-calorie, high-protein food rich in minerals such as iron,calcium, and zinc.

• Since 2012, Canada’s exports of live horses for slaughter have been almost entirely destined for Japan, and Canada has been Japan’s largest supplier in most years with a market share ranging from 29% to 46% over the years. Japan receives about two shipments per month of live horses for slaughter from Canada, and on average, a shipment contains 100-125 horses. Foals from 6-9 months are transported to feedlots where they remain until the age of 2. Then they are flown overseas from Edmonton, Calgary, and Winnipeg.

• With the lowest food self-sufficiency level ratio among G7 countries (38% in FY 2021/22), food security is a major concern for Japan. This concern was further aggravated by the spate of export restrictions on agricultural goods that governments implemented as supply chains were roiled by COVID-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

• Canada and Japan are both members of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement on Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and share a likeminded view regarding an international rules-based trading system.

• Any Canadian exporter who has successfully negotiated a commercial contract with an importer in Japan and who can comply with Japan’s import conditions (as specified in an established health certificate) may export horses to Japan. What is required to meet these expectations was redacted from the FOIA.

• In 2021, Canada was the world’s eighth largest exporter of horse meat, with exports valued at $28.6 million.

Understanding and mitigating unintended consequences is important for effective governance and policymaking. Whenever you read any claims about horse slaughter from the following groups, you know they are going to be about as impartial as David Duke’s critical review of Alex Haley’s “Roots.” Most exasperatingly, AAFC included numerous references to outdated and debunked articles, from as far back as 2006 (preceding the cessation of horse slaughter in the US). It’s unclear why promotional material for horse slaughter was included at all, since most horses shipped for export are purpose-bred or are “byproducts” of an industry that breeds horses for other purposes.

These supplemental materials included:

 • A 2006 document from Animal Welfare Council, Inc. Colorado Springs, Colorado. 

• Unintended consequences of horse slaughter, by Sara Wyant of Agri-Pulse, who promoted the 2012 horse slaughter plant proposal by United Horsemen.

• An assortment of refuted references and pro-slaughter organizations who want to convince you to upgrade to a new $5,000 AQHA horse, but need to provide you with a pathway to dispose of your $500 horse who is stubbornly clinging to life.

• Canadian Meat Council, prepared in consultation with Bouvry Exports and Jennifer Woods of J. Woods Livestock Services. 

• The inclusion of an article from BEEF magazine blaming horses for irreversibly damaging rangelands, and proclaiming slaughter as needed for “good horse welfare.” The author, Courtney L Daigle, an Assistant Professor of Animal Welfare at pro-slaughter Texas A&M University, claims that horse slaughter is “doing the right thing for the animals.”

These pro-slaughter articles, which somehow found their way into a discussion on live horse export, are very familiar to those of us who have been advocating against slaughter and live export for years. Over time, the purported claims became truth to many in the horse industry who were saddened to hear of such reports, and while conflicted about slaughter, began to believe that it was the better alternative for horses facing such neglect and abuse.  

The “Horse Welfare” Alliance of Canada, which churns out its own brand of pro-slaughter propaganda and receives hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants from the Canadian government, asserted that live export is needed to enrich 347 breeders who provide purpose-bred horses, 25% being indigenous. A request for clarification on the number of indigenous exporters was answered by the CFIA National Issues Manager, who stipulated that there are no known indigenous producers of horses for export. While 347 breeders seems like a huge number of suppliers in this industry, the reality is that there are only 4 active exporters and the 2 largest breeders for export are in Ontario. The bulk of the profit from this industry goes to Ontarians, including WillJill Farms.

These primary exporters purchase horses from a few hundred producers (the remaining 343 approved “exporters”) from different farming situations. Most horse breeders supplying this market breed horses for other purposes and comprise a very small secondary market in an industry that is less than 20 years old.

There is little support by humane agencies and the general public for the continuation of this barbaric trade.  A poll conducted by the BCSPCA found that only 22% of those polled want to continue the export of live horses. Equestrian Canada was approached as part of the stakeholder communication process and acknowledged that most of their members opposed horse export for slaughter.  The BCSPCA also weighed-in with their opposition to the transport of horses overseas. Katherine Curry – President Racetracks Canada, announced full support for the Bill. Toolika Rastogi, PhD, senior manager, policy and research for Humane Canada, also reached out to decry the trade. Other stakeholders included the Winnipeg HS, The Canadian Horse Defence Coalition, and Animal Justice, who has recently carried out a successful private prosecution of live shipper Carolyle Farms (a legal avenue that would not be necessary had the CFIA decided to take action themselves). The government also acknowledges receiving letters in the “tens of thousands,” from individuals opposed to live export. Also included in the FOIA documents were several redacted letters from the general public.

Bill C-355 has passed the Agriculture Committee; once this process is complete, the chairperson of the committee submits a report back to the chamber and will move onto its third and final reading and vote at the House of Commons. It will go for a final vote in the House before moving to the Senate. Once the Bill receives Royal assent it wouldn’t come into force for 18 months. Senator Dalphond’s concurrent Senate Bill S-270 is also active.

Well-said, Senator!

Reading the contents of the FOIA and watching debates of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, reminds us of how vigilant we must be challenging propaganda. At numerous points in the aforementioned debate, groups and individuals needed to correct the record on horse transport and the HAR as being some sort of divine document that ensured humane treatment. It’s exasperating to hear that politicians believe the standard of care for high-value, competitive horses is to ship them 4 at a time in flimsy wooden crates without food or water, just like slaughter-bound horses. Refuting incorrect information is essential for combating deliberate disinformation campaigns aimed at manipulating public opinion and sowing division. It requires vigilance, transparency, and a commitment to accuracy from all stakeholders, including governments, media organizations, educators, and individuals. Many groups and private individuals have written to correct the public record on predatory horse industries, including John Holland of the Equine Welfare Alliance. If you’re new to this discussion, please read some of his analytical writings, which directly address many of the falsehoods perpetuated by the above groups. 

John Holland, Pres. of Equine Welfare Alliance, corrects BEEF magazine commentary on horse slaughter in the U.S.

There is a growing international movement to end live export of animals, driven by concerns for animal welfare, ethical treatment, and environmental sustainability. Canada implementing a ban would signal its commitment to aligning with these global trends and adopting progressive policies:

• After 6,000 cattle and 41 crew members drowned in a typhoon, New Zealand banned live export.

• A Bill introduced in the UK commons would ban live export of certain livestock.

• Germany will withdraw export certificates for cattle, sheep, and goats, to countries outside the EU.

• The Australian government has committed to phase out live export of sheep by sea.

• In 2023, a Brazilian judge banned live cattle exports.

“Animals are not things. They are sentient living beings…
individuals who feel hunger, thirst, pain, cold, anguish, fear.”

~Judge Djalma Gomes

For further reading – entire FOIA package available on ScribD – https://www.scribd.com/document/719022114/A-2200-00120-Release-Package

and here – https://heatherclemenceau.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/a-2200-00120-release-package.pdf

This Sounds Familiar….Lame Mare Sent to Slaughter From Rimbey Auction

Written by: Heather Clemenceau

A desperately lame mare was offered for sale at the Rimbey Livestock Auction Mart in Alberta, on June 16th. Video of the mare taken at the auction showed that she could not bear weight comfortably on her forefeet, and still images showed her standing in the classic laminitic stance, and lying down while other horses in the same pen were standing. This was a 13 year old pasture mate, weighing 1,070 lbs, who was described in the owner statement in the FOIA as “arthritic but not diagnosed by a veterinarian,” having suffered some kind of injury at the age of 5.

The mare was sold to a kill buyer and subsequently to Bouvry Exports, after potential rescuers were out-bid at the auction. As video evidence taken at the auction showed that the horse was barely ambulatory, the horse should not have been loaded on a trailer, yet, the mare had been loaded up for the (highly impractical and unnecessary) 4 hour journey to Rimbey and was ultimately slaughtered at Bouvry for the non-EU market on or about July 19, 2021, after being in transit for 3.5 more hours.

From The National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) Equine Code of Practice:

8.1.1 Fitness for Transport

“Horse owners and persons transporting horses have a primary responsibility for determining if an animal is fit for the expected duration of the trip. While the driver should not be relied upon to determine whether the horse is fit for transport, they have the right and responsibility to refuse to load a horse that they recognize as unfit.

Do not load horses with a reduced capacity to withstand transportation. These animals may show signs of infirmity, illness or injury (31). Never transport a horse unless you are sure it is healthy enough to withstand the stress of the entire expected trip (including intermediate stops). Each case must be judged individually, and the welfare of the horse must be the first consideration. If you are not sure whether a horse is fit for the trip, do not transport – contact a veterinarian.

When animals are unfit for transport, you must provide treatment until the animal is fit for the trip or not transport the animal, and, if necessary, euthanize the animal. Per the Health of Animals Regulations, it is illegal to load or unload a non-ambulatory animal unless the animal is being transported with special provisions for veterinary treatment or diagnosis, upon the recommendation of a veterinarian.”

The National Farm Animal Care Council is comprised of stakeholders primarily made up of farmers and veterinarians. What the NFACC has published are merely “guidelines,” which do not have the force of law behind them, as opposed to regulations, which are directly enforceable. So of course, sellers, auctions, kill buyers, and slaughterhouses thrive in the ambiguity of the language and lack of force in the guidelines.

CFIA Response to Growing Public Discontent

The FOIA response from the CFIA revealed that they received many messages of concern (friends might recognize their own message included in the PDF below). So the the Red Deer district office put on their CSI goggles and went to the auction house and contacted the mare’s owner (the EID is included in the FOIA documentation). The inspector’s report of July 22nd specifically made mention of the owner being asked whether the mare was administered any bute or banamine as a result of being “arthritic.”

It’s also revealing that while the owner admitted the horse was “arthritic,” and had a “slight limp” while getting off the trailer, the Rimbey auction response to the CFIA was that the mare was not lame when she came off the trailer, nor was she lame when she went through the auction (??!?) but because they placed her on a concrete pad over the weekend while the pens were being cleaned. Does anyone else think that the “concrete pad” is a convenient excuse for explaining acute lameness away to dismiss any future complaints about horses that can barely stand? And if concrete pads make horses stiff or lame, why put them there? It seems inconceivable after watching the video that this horse could be “offloaded at Bouvry with no apparent problems.” Has any animal ever been deemed too lame to ship by an auction mart or kill buyer? 

Where this investigation falls down, as it usually does, is in the lack of accountability for transport by everyone involved, and drug testing of the remains of this poor suffering animal. The auction house claimed that the SPCA was also involved; any action taken by them (highly doubtful) is not included for our review. And as always, the CFIA seems to leave any testing up to the discretion of the slaughterhouse.

It’s my own opinion that it’s heartless and generally illegal to deny an animal pain-relieving medication,  especially when a veterinarian or farrier indicates that it is in pain. I can’t decide which is worse – denying an animal medication because it might affect the ability to wring those last few dollars off of it, or “buting” it and sending it to slaughter anyway.  This particular owner confirmed to the CFIA that they did not administer bute to lessen this mare’s pain and did not seek veterinary opinion.

When an animal is in this much discomfort, he or she is now on its own timeline, not ours. We can’t choose to euthanize it or otherwise end its life on our schedule. If your animal is diagnosed by a veterinarian as non-viable/in pain/unrecoverable injury, it is now our responsibility to humanely euthanize him or her to avoid further suffering. Auctions are merely dumping grounds used by many miserly, unfeeling owners.

“The pound of flesh which I demand of him Is deerely bought, ’tis mine, and I will have it. I am sorry for thee: thou art come to answer
A stony adversary, an inhuman wretch
uncapable of pity, void and empty
From any dram of mercy.”

Read the FOIA Documentation:

http

View this document on Scribd

Richelieu Slaughterhouse – Breaking Bad Again!

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

How often do you hear or see an ad that leaves you questioning the claims being made? Anyone who knows me knows that both online and IRL, I am a “super-complainer.” You really have no choice anymore, because “fake news” permeates literally every subject.

A few months ago I visited the Richelieu horse slaughterhouse website as I am wont to do every few months,  just to see what nonsense they are purporting.  There’s usually always something that can be used to launch an official complaint, and they didn’t disappoint.  Claims about horsemeat for pregnant women and for those prone to infection really drew my ire.  It’s not very smart to put out information that is so easily discredited. But nobody said horse killers are smart.

It took complaints to Ad Standards, Health Canada, and finally the CFIA (who acted upon the complaint) to do something about it.  The CFIA didn’t say exactly what they did or what they counselled Richelieu to remove or stop posting on their website, but I was very pleased that they looked at my materials and saw that the horse killers were using language that amounted to a murky sea of nutritional “advice.”

Our community of anti-slaughter advocates is strong and engaged! If you see questionable or false claims being made about the quality or nutritional value of horsemeat or indeed any animal product, please contact:

Ad Standards

The CFIA

Health Canada

Competition Bureau of Canada

READ THE CFIA Letter 

Viandes Richelieu – Lost in Translation (Again)

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

It can be a daunting challenge for consumers to separate true advertising claims from false ones. This is especially true with industries that slaughter animals – in the interest of public image, they are anxious to avoid any terminology that suggests that animals in the food chain die horrible deaths. The term “processing” is now to be used instead of “slaughter,” because of the latter term’s association with mass murder.  And while the CFIA heavy-handedly enforces decades old product descriptions that don’t take into consideration the proliferation of newly available plant-based foods, no one is minding the store at the Viandes Richelieu website, where the company makes claims, without evidence, that horsemeat is “good for pregnant women and anemics” and is advisable for individuals with “an increased risk of infections.”  It looks like VR’s marketing department could use a good proofreader, or as they say in French, un bon relecteur.  So what’s going on here?  Is this a faux pas, or a jeu de mots gone wrong?

These types of random statements are pretty risky claims for a slaughterhouse to make.  Health Canada has some pretty onerous “Guiding Principles” for product labels and advertising about food characteristics and related health benefits – obviously, because these types of claims influence people’s buying habits.  And Health Canada’s standards of evidence are generally consistent with those of other scientific and regulatory authorities, including the European Food Safety Authority.

Consider that “a health claim is a statement or representation that states, suggests or implies that a relation exists between a food or component of that food and health” in Health Canada’s guidance documents on nutrition. These types of claims (about infection and health in pregnancy) fall under “Disease risk reduction claims” and “function claims.” When someone advertises a claim about their product’s ability to treat a health condition, mitigate a disease, or about restoring, correcting or modifying body functions – they must be prepared to back it up.  Ideally, the company is supposed to submit these claims to Health Canada so they can be reviewed BEFORE publishing them anywhere. Neither can a company typically make non-specific or general claims (for example, “horsemeat is beneficial to health” or “horsemeat supports immune health”) since these are subject to multiple interpretations and are potentially misleading.

Making health claims are totally optional for a food product. But if and when a claim is made, it must be truthful and not misleading, according to Subsection 5(1) of the Food and Drugs Act. This means that producers must have scientific evidence to substantiate a food health claim prior to its use. Subsection 3(1) of the FDA goes on to state that no person shall advertise any food, drug, cosmetic or device to the general public as a treatment, preventative or cure for any of the diseases, disorders or abnormal physical states referred to in Schedule A.

There are some great precedents whereby manufacturers have been slapped down for making dubious or unsupported claims in the past. One of the most famous examples occurred when, in 2011,  the Kellogg Co. paid $5 million back to consumers for making the common claim that its Rice and Cocoa Krispies can help a child’s immune system, shortly after a similar settlement concerning its Frosted Mini-Wheats.

The marketing folks at Viandes Richelieu must be under terrible pressure – they blame activists for the unpopularity of their product in an article published in the French language Journal de Montréal.

“There is no restaurant that wants to use it because of the threats. We, too, have it continuously. Our equipment must be monitored 24 hours a day,” declared spokesperson Marc Bouvry in a translated statement about the Bouvry operations in Alberta (VR is also part of the Bouvry horse slaughter empire).  Hey Marc, maybe this industry isn’t worth it – at least, that’s the consensus of about 69% of Canadians.  Time to find more socially acceptable work. So that’s why I’ll be writing to Health Canada, to ask them to make a determination about the appropriateness of these claims made by Viandes Richelieu. Not too long after sending a letter to Advertising Standards Canada about statements made on Richelieu’s website in 2011,  I received a response from ASC indicating that the company had revamped their website to remove the misleading claims.

 

I didn’t realize that you could request a purebred horse steak (or an “old half-bred” for that matter either).

 

 

 

Horsemeat Adulterated Sausages – Where Deception and Detection Intersect

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

A few months ago the CFIA funded a study of sausages that determined that 20 per cent of samples from grocery stores across Canada contained meats that weren’t on the label. The study, which was prompted by the European horsemeat scandal of 2013, was conducted by researchers at the University of Guelph, and DNA profiling was used to detect the species found in sausages that were labelled as containing just one ingredient – beef, pork, chicken or turkey.

Seven of 27 beef sausages examined in the study were found to contain pork. One of 38 supposedly pure pork sausages contained horse meat. Of 20 chicken sausages, four also contained turkey and one also contained beef.  The contamination isn’t exactly surprising (if processing  facilities have horsemeat, they need to find a way to get rid of it).  The CFIA investigated all cases of mis-labelled sausages and in the case of the chicken labelled as turkey, it was able to find issues with a manufacturer’s “traceability program” – incoming meat and production records were not properly maintained. The incident concerning horsemeat was not investigated because the company responsible voluntarily ceased operations (the way all slaughter operations should end).  Explanations for the adulteration of the remaining sausages appears to be more complex.

There are usually two kinds of food adulteration – where the butcher/supplier deliberately or accidentally adds another species, or simple cross-contamination – meat can also come into contact with knives or preparation materials.  Since the CFIA reported that the contamination was not found at trace amounts, we should assume the adulteration occurred as a result of either outright fraud or incompetency in handling/labelling meats.

My initial ATI to the CFIA requested the brand/store names where the sausages had been purchased – this is, IMO, one of the most important details that was never published in any report.  The CFIA complied with the paperwork included below, but the open-records request remained only partially complete.  After much follow-up,  the CFIA indicated that they were prepared to release this information,  but their attempt to disclose identifying details about the sausage supply chain was met was met with a refusal to comply by the named companies.  According to the provisions of the Access to Information Act (ATIA), respondents are asked to agree to disclose information to the requesters in an open-records request.  So an application was made for judicial review in order to attempt to remedy this refusal to disclose.  Judicial review of an administrative action is only available for decisions made by a governmental or quasi-governmental authority. The practice is meant to ensure that powers delegated by government to boards and tribunals are not abused, and offers legal recourse when that power is misused, or the law is misapplied. Judicial review is meant to be a last resort for those seeking to redress a decision of an administrative decision maker.

It’s alarming that the identity of the companies who failed to protect consumers from this food adulteration may end up being concealed from the public, depending on the findings of the judicial review.  Food adulteration, whether unintentional or fraudulent, is not victimless.  What is at stake is the entire food economy.  Consumer trust is being lost – the industry also hurts itself since it’s unlikely that consumers will pay more for a product they suspect may be adulterated.  The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) recommends that voluntary audit and improved detection programs are a deterrence to food transparency issues. Suppliers are encouraged to facilitate appropriate testing procedures and retailers to partner with academia to forecast risk, and with suppliers and manufacturers to verify authenticity of the products they receive.  It sure sounds like the retailers who distributed these sausages have no testing/audit programs of their own to verify that the labelling accurately represents the contents of the products they purchase!

We know that despite horsemeat being consumed in Quebec and a few restaurants throughout the country, the only way to sell large quantities of it is to disguise it as something else.  Clearly the demand for horsemeat is not there in the marketplace, otherwise it could be sold as-is.

Let’s hope that the protection of brand integrity does not supercede the rights of consumers.

 

 

View this document on Scribd

Access-To-Information Docs Reveal Auctions and Feedlots are “Bad at Paperwork”

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

“…all horse meat producers must obtain the health and medical history – complete with information on all drugs and vaccines used – of each horse for the 180 day period before consumption.”

– standard form letter response from Conservative MPs – 2016.

Whenever I read documents obtained through an Access-To-Information request, I think the bar for this industry cannot go lower. The ATI documents included here covered all Equine Lot Inspection Audits for the years 2015-2017 year-to-date, and captured conversations between CFIA veterinarians and feedlot/auction staff.  These Lot Inspections are audits that are carried out approximately once a year, although it appears that our favourite Farmville operators, Bouvry Exports’/Prime lot is being audited more frequently. When you read the audit reports, you’ll understand why – the CFIA appears to be doing a fair bit of manual checking of their record-keeping.

It should really come as no surprise that feedlots and auctions have a perpetual struggle with the paperwork required to track horses from receipt to slaughter.  Kill buyers are bottom level feeders who travel from auction to auction picking up horses. They have no idea where these horses come from, nor do they care.  Auctions and feedlots typically will complete just enough paperwork so that can scrape by, and they’re going to fill it out in the way that it needs to be filled out so that it meets the CFIA criteria. Sometimes though, they can’t even meet the minimum standard and even the CFIA has to write them up when uncomplicated record management tasks are turned into Sisyphean clusterfucks.

So what is the Lot Program and how does it work?

The lot program is used by high volume accumulators of horses for the purpose of slaughter.  It’s really a sort of “express lane” in that these producers use a group declaration (the Lot-EID or LEID) in lieu of individual EIDs. The program requires at least a 180 day recorded history prior to slaughter. Lot inspections review the procedures maintained in Lot Programs for equine feedlots – this covers the control of EIDs (Equine Information Documents), vaccines, medications, movement of horses in and out of each lot and a few other criteria.  Please note that the lot program does not verify the health of any equines or the condition of the feedlot itself. The CFIA describes the process in more detail if you need it.

If you’re new to the horse slaughter issue, here’s a bit of history on the EID – its implementation  was announced by then-Director of the Meat Programs Division of the CFIA, Dr. Richard Arsenault, in a response letter to the European Commission on October 23, 2009.  Arsenault announced that, in order to meet EC requirements for exporting horsemeat, every equine presented for slaughter as of July 31, 2010 would be accompanied by an Equine Information Document.

Fast forward to 2014 when the European Commission’s Food and veterinary Office released an audit in 2014 that raised concerns about the tracking process.  In 2011 the same issues were raised, so you could say there’s little evidence of improvement. You can read the final report,  the response, and the CFIA proposed changes.

The audits reveal that, shockingly, Bouvry Exports/Prime Feedlot holds anywhere from 7,000 – 10,000 horses at any given time.  According to the audit reports,  a total of 52 lots of horses are sent to their deaths each year (1 lot per week).  Additionally, horses who receive any medication while on the lot are subjected to painful branding and re-branding as part of the record-keeping process.

Forms Are So Hard And Confusing!

The February 2016 audit of Bouvry’s Prime Feedlot (where the report indicated 10,000+ horses were on-hand) contained some findings flagged as “unacceptable” by the Veterinarian-in-Charge:

Finding #6 and #7 (see pages 31 and 35): – “…drug list was changed in August but not updated.  CFIA wasn’t informed.  Instead of Derapen (penicillin G Procain) which is no longer available, Biomycin is used since August 2015.  Biomycin is not authorized to be used yet.“ At the time of writing, Biomycin is not even listed on the Meat Hygiene manual for equines.  The manufacturer of Biomycin states that is has a withdrawal time of 28 days (for cattle).

Finding #20 (see page 32 and 36): – “One of the records reviewed was not transferred from daily vaccine application records (lot records) to a Lot Equine Information Document.  Fluvac vaccine application was missing.  All other records verified during the audit were accurately transcribed.”

Finding #25 (see page 33 and 36): – “No EIDS on file, none reviewed.  [Redacted] said the horse [kill] buyers did not supply any of EIDS [SIC] along with horses purchased.  This issue was discussed at the previous audit and Prime Equine Lot.”

So there were no EIDs on file for an entire lot of horses?  What happened to slaughter-bound horses without them?  There is no mention of what became of them, or whether anyone attempted to locate the missing paperwork, although I presume the horses were slaughtered anyway, no matter how laughably incomplete or non-compliant the paperwork was.

“It is the responsibility of the Lot Program management to request EIDS and verify for non-permitted drugs.”

Supplemental Export Reports for a May 2016 visit that summarizes communications with regards to an Operational Guidance protocol distributed in February 2016. (page 45-47)

Perlich Bros. Auction  gets called out for not collecting EIDs:

“[Redacted] contacted [redacted] of Perlich auction market over the phone in April 2016 (specific date unknown). The purpose of the call was explained, and [redacted] was asked about the creation of EIDs at his auction market.  [Redacted’s] response was that, while [redacted] staff were happy to handle any EIDS that are submitted with equines for sale, no effort is made to ensure that horses enter auction with complete EIDS, that is is [SIC] “not their job,” and that the responsibility for obtaining valid EIDS lies with the buying agent.  Very few are thus processed at [redacted] auction.”  At this late stage (7 years after the implementation of the EID), how is it that the incomprehensibly stubborn auction staff can give the standard disclaimer, “that’s not my department?”

CFIA resorts to googling kill buyers/plant management for follow-up information:

“On 12 April [redacted] received a list of buying agents for the Bouvry plant from [redacted] who was, at the time, a CFIA meat hygiene inspector at the plant. When contact information was requested for these individuals, so that upcoming verifications could be discussed, it was requested that an explanation/reasoning for the request be sent directly to plant management.  This was done by [redacted] on 13 April.  Having not received a response by early the next week, a Google search was conducted to find a contact number for [redacted] spoke to [redacted] over the phone on 18 or 19 April.  The potential for CFIA presence at upcoming horse auctions was discussed, as was the method with which he goes about obtaining EIDS for slaughter horses.  [Redacted] reply was that [redacted] no longer buys horses for this purpose (slaughter) at Perlich auction because of the difficulty of obtaining EIDs.  [Redacted] rather focuses on the Innisfail Auction Market (IAM) where all horses enter auction with EID unless explicitly declared by the owner that the animal is not for meat sale. There [redacted] is able to enter the ring and verify that the EID is acceptable before bidding on the horse.”

So who is “redacted” in this scenario?  Clearly there is more than one person whose name has been concealed.  Either this person is a kill buyer(s) or plant management, in which case, if they didn’t respond to the CFIA enquiry,  that’s pretty inexcusable.

“[Redacted] encouraged the CFIA to audit [redacted] activities at the IAM.”

CFIA to Bouvry – EIDs must accompany all horses to the feedlot:

“It was felt that in order to conduct the verification task correctly, the district needed to be clear on whether or not it was permissible for horses bought in Canada to enter the feedlot system without an EID…”  “The response was that unless there was some other auditable means (on file) of ensuring a history of no non-permitted substances in the horse(s) no horse without a valid EID is allowed to enter the feedlot, despite a six-month waiting period.”

The CFIA’s attempt to enforce what must seem like an unfathomable bureaucracy apparently perturbed staff at Bouvry’s, who sent an inquiry to the CFIA asking why [redacted] was “asking so many questions.” Due to the difficulties with paperwork at the Perlich auction, the CFIA discussed attending their auction on overtime and it was decided that this was not a valuable use of CFIA resources. Recommendations were passed to the Red Deer CFIA office for a vet inspector presence at Innisfail.

The confusion that continues to this day over the EID and other paperwork is evidence that inputs into the food chain are not something to be taken casually, yet that is exactly what is happening.  The doubts highlighted in these reports leave another cloud over the already sordid industry – something policymakers need to pay attention to.

Despite this, Dr. Richard Arsenault, former director of the meat programs division for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), thinks that the regulations are working.  “It’s extremely well respected in terms of compliance” – a statement that he has continually championed throughout the years. This is basically the same feeble confirmation that is echoed by anyone in charge of any aspect of the meat program at the CFIA. Downstream, MPs may take months before they reply to our complaints about horse slaughter, and if they do it’s usually nothing more than the standard form letter that doesn’t even address the concerns raised by the constituent.  Instead, the response parrots the same impotent reassurances put out by the CFIA.

The horse slaughter pipeline is one of the most unregulated livestock venues in North America. There is absolutely no desire or motivation on the US side to enforce EID authenticity because Americans do not eat horsemeat. There is no resolve on the Canadian side because they are importing horses for the purpose of (primarily) exporting the meat. Regulating this paperwork would cost everyone money, and no one wants to do that.

View this document on Scribd

You may also download these documents here.

Horse Welfare 2016 – The Year In Review

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

Because most efforts at altruism are applied to human suffering, when it comes to horses and other animals, we still face the problem of convincing people that the suffering of horses is worth considering at all. Our legal and legislative efforts can be effective ways to achieve goals for the horses, but most campaigns are lower visibility when compared to shelter pets,  and they may only yield results if completely successful. After observing how horse advocacy functions for a few years now (but I am still a relative newbie compared to the seasoned experts who have been advocating for horses for decades)  I want to make the following observations on the year 2016:

To be effective, we must continually find the root causes of systemic problems, such as corrupt or indifferent government officials, hoarding issues, and our often reactionary approach to kill buyer sales programs, which are now entrenched methods of adopting horses.  This is no small feat considering how decentralized horse advocates are – each person is often doing their own thing and advocating for horses in their own way.  As a result, preventative approaches are sometimes overlooked within the movement.   Despite exhaustive work by many people, SAFE Act-type legislation, which could provide the best results for horses in the US, hasn’t passed.

We may best be able to capitalize on shifts in the way people think about all animals and their status in society.  Results in Canada have been achieved when contracts for horsemeat are lost due to the exposing of cruelty and food quality/feedlot issues.  Meat-swapping is also an issue that usually gets a lot of publicity.  The supply of horsemeat already exceeds demand otherwise we would see fewer substitution issues – many people are realizing that they are eating horse unintentionally and this causes them to reconsider buying meat in general.

Unfortunately, 2016 heralded in new administration that is not friendly to animals.  P-E Trump is known to receive advice from conspiracy theorists and the radical far right – it’s true that we have become a “post-fact” world. Knowing this, how can we best advocate for horses in 2017 and beyond? There mere suggestion that there may be jobs to be found in the horse slaughter industry could be incentive enough to resuscitate it in the US, even though it is a poor investment.

“Donald Trump…represents perhaps the greatest threat ever to animal protection policy making at the federal level. His campaign surrogates and the names being floated as possible Trump cabinet picks for the very agencies that oversee such policies include the most ardent anti-animal voices in the country. Advocates for puppy mills, factory farming, horse slaughter, and trophy hunting of rare species such as leopards and elephants would be at the steering wheel of a Trump administration.” ~ Michael Markarian, the Human Society Legislative Fund

Here’s my summation of 2016, with articles arranged in Storify:

The Chemical Horse:

• Horsenetwork reported that Pfizer Canada has announced it will increase the amount of pregnant mare urine (PMU) it collects from its facilities in the Canadian provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in 2016 and 2017. Demand for conjugated equine estrogens declined in recent years following a 2002 Women’s Health Initiative study that PMU drugs were linked to an increased risk of breast cancer. (In 2012, the North American Menopause Society released a position statement that continues to support hormone therapy).
• Horse tendons are now being made into an anti-aging therapy to rival botox. The popularity of horse oil from slaughtered animals has increased exponentially and is sold extensively on Amazon, eBay and elsewhere.
• A video released in October showed the appalling treatment of horses at antitoxin and antivenom manufacturing facilities in India.  The facilities draw blood from the horses, many of them multiple times a month with heavy gauge needles, to manufacture antitoxin and antivenom drugs.  The horses depicted in the video (link included below) had festering sores and low body weights.

Live Horse Shipments:

• Throughout 2016, the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition continued to release footage of live horse exports to Japan and petitioned Atlas Air executives to stop the practice, which does not adhere to IATA regulations.

Anti-Soring Efforts:

• In August, U.S. Department of Agriculture/APHIS proposed changes to the Horse Protection Act that could stop the soring abuse for good.
• Anti-soring advocates got the Big Lick kicked out of the North Carolina State Fair

Food Adulteration:

• In June, a butcher shop in Montreal was caught adding horsemeat to hamburger patties advertised as being entirely made of beef. An investigation by Radio-Canada found burger patties advertised as being 100 per cent beef from La Maison du Rôti, which supplied meat to many hotels and commercial establishments in Montreal.  This is consistent with a study from 2015 that found that nearly 5% of all ground meat products tested in California had horse meat in the product.
• In Britain, two Britons and a citizen of Denmark appeared in court over allegations that they passed horsemeat off as beef. It took THREE YEARS after the horsemeat adulteration scandal in to get them this far.
• Britain’s food-policing unit, which was created in 2014 following the horse meat scandal has still not resulted in any new prosecutions despite costing the taxpayer £4m. The National Food Crime Unit (NFCU)  has not brought any criminal charges against anyone.

Wild Horses:

• Aaron Stelkia of the Osoyoos Indian Band, who has apparently provided no care to feral British Columbia horses, decided to claim them and began rounding them up early in the year.  On the heels of this event, the RCMP in Penticton B.C., at the request of the CFIA, began investigating horse rescuer Theresa Nolet after she treated a free-roaming horse with phenylbutazone, making him unfit for human consumption.  If the CFIA, the RCMP, or the SPCA actually had any concern for horses, they would require the Indian Bands to keep their horses contained and properly fed and medicated.  It’s clear the intent was to harass Ms. Nolet, since the CFIA has no problem importing American horses whose drug history is completely unprovable.
• DNA genotyping of Alberta wild horses showed a connection to the Altai horse from Russia. These genetic markers permitted the placement of the horses on the endangered list by the Equus Survival Trust in North Carolina. 
• Forty-five years ago the Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (WFRH&B Act) was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on December 18, 1971. The WFRH&B Act created the sensation that wild horses were to be protected on public land, but as it did not create actual defined parameters it has been left open to interpretation and/or lack of enforcement by the US judicial system.

Decimation of the Donkeys:

• Now that the West African black rhino is extinct and the elephant is well on its way, donkey skins are the new rhino horn, and just like the rhino, the Chinese demand is unsustainable. To that end, a $3,000,000 slaughterhouse has just opened in Kenya – dedicated and purpose-built to kill up to 100 donkeys a day. China is presently responsible for slaughtering four million donkeys a year for traditional medicinal products made from their skin. Already, countries in Africa are seeing their donkey populations drop at an alarming rate – the appetite for donkey skins has risen to such a degree that a worldwide crisis is unfolding for donkey populations around the world.  In the United States the population of donkeys is estimated to be between 250,000 and 400,000. The US’ wild burro population ranges between 4,000 to 10,000 total on all BLM public lands.  The entire US population of donkeys could theoretically be wiped out in a matter of weeks at the current rate of slaughter.

Cruelty Cases, Horse Seizures, Abandonments, and Hoarding:

• The infamous Stanley Brothers have been shipping horses to slaughter for quite some time and also have a long history of animal welfare offenses, among other questionable activities.  Boots Stanley, the son of one of the Stanley Brothers, who became millionaires selling horses to be killed, was arrested along with his pal Steven Sadler, for aggravated animal cruelty after slitting a defenseless dog’s throat on the family’s kill lot in Bastrop, Louisiana. Someone who enjoys inflicting pain on an animal may well be a danger to their community soon.
• “Big Lick” supporter Sandra Darlene Wood will be serving jail time for the crime of Animal Cruelty – starving Tennessee Walking Horses that were seized from her farm on April 6, 2015.
• Logan Allen, a “horse trainer” who won 1st place in the 2013 Iowa Horse Fair found himself under fire after he posted pics to his Facebook wall of a horse with the caption “bad boy…”  The horse lay on the ground, his legs were bound, his tongue hung out of his mouth and he had been sprayed with a hose,  hence the treatment of the horse was referred to as “waterboarding.”  The dismissal of Allen’s case sends the clear message to those in Iowa that abusing animals is acceptable in the state.
• The story of Lily, the little pony mare who appeared to have been shot up with a paintball gun and then abandoned at New Holland in Pennsylvania, was a simultaneously uplifting and heartbreaking narrative.  The mare, who was rescued and subsequently endured an eye operation for painful uveitis inflammation and days of dental work, was elderly and in poor condition overall.  In May, Philip Price Jr. of Rhode Island, (previously convicted of animal abuse) was convicted on all counts related to transporting her to New Holland.  He was ordered to pay $13,000 in restitution for Lily’s recovery care costs.  Lily was then adopted by former Daily Show Host Jon Stewart and his wife.  Although her quality of life appears to have been quite low for some time, she knew kindness and care before she died a short time later in Stewart’s sanctuary.
• In June, officials with the Kentucky Department of Agriculture charged trainer Maria Borell and her father, Charles Borell, each with 43 counts of second-degree cruelty to animals in connection with the apparent abandonment of horses at a 121-acre farm in Central Kentucky.
• 40 deceased and decaying horses were found on a property near Melbourne Australia. Bruce Akers, was charged with 92 counts of animal cruelty and criminal damage.
• Another 40 horses (and 15 dogs)  owned by a previously convicted mother/daughter team of animal hoarders were seized from a Virginia property.
• In July, horse rescuers saved from slaughter several horses formerly owned by the Arnold Reproduction Center, which specialized in cutting horse breeding. A herd of horses bearing the brand of center ended up scheduled for shipment to slaughter, according to social media posts, which the business acknowledged in a statement last week, calling the slaughter designation unintended. Photos posted by the Kaufman Kill Pen Facebook page showed show at least a dozen horses bearing the brand and/or distinctive shoulder numbers, with some described as recipient mares.
• Several horses that had been seized from the Peaceable Farm rescue in 2015 have again been taken by authorities from New Beginnings Horse Rescue, where they had little or no food and water.  Over 80 horses were originally removed from Peaceable Farm and 11 of those horses went to New Beginnings (the other horses were distributed to other rescues).  It’s been a horrible 2 years for some of the rescues in Virginia.
• Approximately 550-650 “wild” horses of varying ages, some mares with foals, went up for auction in December when approximately 30 were found starving or eviscerated on the bare dirt pastures of the ranch belonging to the International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros in South Dakota. With no plan in place to prevent breeding and insufficient range land for the number of horses, the pastures had been eaten down to dirt. Photos on social media show severely thin horses, some of them dead, with their ribs and hip-bones protruding. Some have grotesque wounds and injuries or wildly overgrown, untrimmed hooves. A few had been eviscerated, presumably by wild animals. Guidestar shows that despite the charity taking in $600 – $700K in donations per year, there were always feed emergencies – this appears to be another hoarding operation with charitable status.  Resources are finite everywhere – uncontrolled breeding with no place to go eventually means there will be a population crash.

Legislative and Public Relations Issues:

• Of the most immediate concern to animal advocates may be the virtual certainty that a Trump administration will work to reopen horse slaughter in the U.S., to “dispose” of the 45,000 wild horses who have been removed as “surplus” from the  BLM.  Furthermore, in 2009 VP-Elect Pence voted against protecting wild horses and burros on America’s public lands. He opposed the “Restore Our American Mustangs Act,” which was introduced to amend the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971.  Simply because you see a picture of someone on a horse,  it does not make them an advocate.
• It has been announced that the European Commission is set to adopt stricter regulations on the import of horsemeat from non-EU countries following its latest audit, which found that Canadian horsemeat may not meet EU food safety standards.  Horses destined for slaughter in non-EU countries but for export to the EU, must undergo a minimum six-month residency requirement. It’s unclear how either the slaughterhouses or the CFIA will control for this requirement.
• The Canadian Horse Defence Coalition met with MPs in Ottawa in October on the dangers of horse meat consumption. The CHDC was registered to lobby with Aaron Freeman of Pivot Strategic Consulting.  The CHDC continues to consult with legal counsel in a continuing effort to explore legal strategies to stop illegally-conducted live shipments of horses to Japan for slaughter.
• The Canadian Food Inspection Agency suspended the slaughtering license of KML Meats in British Columbia temporarily,  due to the absence of an effective HACCP program.
• The CFIA proposed changes to the Health of Animals Act and Regulations, thereby recognizing that the transport of animals in Canada is not aligned with those of other countries (World Organisation for Animal Health – OIE) nor do they align with the National Farm Animal Care Council Codes of Practice (NFACC) or international trading partners such as the US and the EU.  Furthermore, transport guidelines, such as they are, do not reflect current science regarding the handling of animals by land, sea, and air.
• The March to DC on behalf of the SAFE Act took place September 22nd. Thank you to the dedicated people who were able to attend.  Many SAFE-type bills have now died and alternative approaches are needed to make the rest of the US population  aware of the atrocities of horse slaughter.
• The tall metal fences, chained gates, and decaying metal buildings that were an embarrassment and constant reminder of horse slaughter in Kaufman Texas are now gone.  The old Dallas Crown slaughterhouse was torn down.
• In Ontario, “horse rustling” has received new attention after two horses, who were temporarily loaned/boarded, disappeared from the same farm and are presumed sold for slaughter.  Sargon, owned by Kim Wilson, and Apollo, owned by Kayla Whatling were loaned to the same individual, who told police she sold Sargon to a kill buyer for slaughter without permission and with a faked EID.

EQUUS Film Festival:

• The EQUUS Film Festival, dedicated to equestrian-themed film, fine art and authors was subject to controversy in 2016. Noted Equine/Human Chiropractor Dr. Jay Komarek,  declined to accept the Equus Film Festival Award for “Best Documentary” Film citing festival organizers for accepting money from two corporate sponsors,  “Protect The Harvest” and “Farm Paint,”  as his reason for doing so.   The sponsor’s principals are Mr. Forrest Lucas (Protect The Harvest and Lucas Cattle Company) and Mr. Duke Thorson (Farm Paint and Thorsport Farm). Slaughtering and soring horses  do not create a better world for them and were therefore incompatible sponsors for the event.  Clant Seay, a reporter for Billygoboy.com, also had the microphone aggressively grabbed out of his hand by former Sue Wallis buddy Dave Duquette at EQUUS. A positive outcome was that the film “Kill Pen” signed a worldwide/international distribution agreement to circulate the film across the US and Canada, into Europe, and beyond.

 Please read more about these and other headlines from 2016, arranged chronologically, in Storify

 

 

Trail Of Tears For Missing Horses Sargon And Apollo

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

Bad things sometimes happen to good people.  In particular,  people loaning horses out for therapy programs would never imagine stealing a horse so it’s incomprehensible if it happens to them.  It may seem obvious to us that someone who sells or gives away your horse without your permission has essentially stolen him or her,  it’s generally considered a civil matter,  quite unlike what happens when someone cuts your fence and steals your horse directly off your property.  In contrast,  a civil matter is considered a dispute between two parties – if the police decide your case is civil,  they will generally decline to treat it as a crime.  Durham police have  assigned a detective to the case of at least one of the two missing Ontario horses, Sargon and Apollo.  Since the same parties are allegedly involved in the disappearance of more than one horse, perhaps the police have taken the view that an investigation needs to be undertaken to satisfy public interests?

WHO IS LIABLE WHEN LOANED HORSES ARE NOT RETURNED TO THEIR OWNERS ON DEMAND?

Leasing or free board arrangements permit a horse owner who loves their horse, but cannot keep him or hasn’t time to ride him – to lend him to a rider that can maintain him while the owner still has control. “Sent out for training” is a common excuse given when horses disappear from the farms where they have been placed.  The chain of custody for many missing horses often cannot be more opaque, with horses changing hands several times without parties to these transactions necessarily being unaware of the status of the missing horse.  This is why it’s a good practice to check all horses out online when you are considering buying or adopting.

The RCMP website informs us that the police will only investigate alleged fraud under certain circumstances:

“Major fraud within the Commercial Crime Program mandate can be defined as fraud cases of provincial, national or international significance (having due regard for contractual obligations with the provinces) in which one or more of the following elements are present (Corporate Fraud,  credit fraud, investment fraud, securities fraud, mass marketing fraud):

• one or more of the RCMP strategic priorities (i.e. Organized Crime)
• substantial value or financial losses
• substantial impact on victims
• high degree of criminal sophistication
• requirement for special investigative expertise
• municipal, provincial, or federal governments as victim
• satisfying public or national interest”

There’s an old saying that bears repeating – “you will never meet a con-man you don’t like.” While a lease agreement won’t prevent a horse from disappearing if someone has the intent, a written agreement may be a deterrent against someone who impulsively decides to help themselves after identifying a target.  If someone won’t agree to a contract in writing,  walk away.

TIME MARCHES ON QUICKLY WHEN HORSES GO MISSING…

The Canadian Horse Defence Coalition publishes this document to help horse owners locate their horses or get word to the slaughterhouses that a horse has been stolen. Applicable to both Canadians and Americans. Click to view.

You wonder what is happening to the horse…  Is he or she OK;  is someone hurting them?  What is the horse thinking about where he or she now is?  It doesn’t matter if you are pro or anti-slaughter – both sides know that when a horse is taken from you all you can do is think of ways to bring your horse home.

The heartbreak of owners Kim Wilson and Kayla Whatling  is reminiscent of that experienced by American Vicky Johnson, who has invested years into her own personal search for her missing and much loved mares Suzy and Echo, who were apparently sold to a slaughter horse buyer after being promised a caring home. Almost everything told to Vicky about the whereabouts of her horses was a lie, but both had received phenylbutazone and other drugs and medications, prohibited from entering the food chain. No one was ever punished for this crime against Vicky and her horses either.

Unlike with the “traditional” farm animals, there is truly no verification system in place to ensure that horses who do go to slaughter are sent there by those with rightful legal ownership.  Horses sold to slaughterhouses or kill buyers without the owner’s knowledge or permission are sold with Equine Information Documents (EIDs) that were fabricated during the last leg of the horses’ journey to the plant, often by someone who has owned the horse for a few days or weeks if that. Such individuals have no basis to make any claim that the horse has not received any prohibited substances.  Saying you don’t remember whether you shipped a horse or that “many horses look the same” is not an excuse.  In fact, since many horses do look similar this is further testament to the fact that the EIDs do not sufficiently identify them or differentiate between them with any degree of certainty.

Here are scans of the Toronto Sun articles on the missing horses Sargon and Apollo – these articles from the newspaper contain additional information written by The Sun’s crime reporter Chris Doucette, which was not provided in the online versions. With these articles, Mr. Doucette joins the ranks of investigative journalists Mary Ormsby and Dale Brazao of the Toronto Star in addressing the profound shortcomings of the horsemeat trade in Canada.

In the past the Toronto Sun has featured various articles about “bad boy culinists” who promoted  the eating of horsemeat in their restaurants, so this series of articles is definitely a welcome divergence.  [I hope a few foodies and restaurateurs serving horsemeat in Toronto see these articles as well…]

 

[Click on each article to embiggen to read]

 

Food Scientist Claims “Liquid Poured On Pigs” A Biosecurity Risk #PIGTRIAL

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

“…. the actions of these activists simply aren’t safe – not only not for themselves, the truck drivers and their pigs. But also for the consumers,”  writes Keith Warriner,  Professor of Food Science at the University of Guelph. “The seemingly humane gesture of feeding water to pigs can actually jeopardize the system and impact the food you serve to your family.The trial taking place in Toronto has touched upon various angles of this incident. But the key issue is the interference with food safety. For anyone who eats pork, this is a product of a food processing system. And it’s absolutely essential that it’s produced in a closed system that hasn’t been tampered with.”

Dr Warriner recently chose to write a guest column that appeared in the Toronto and Winnipeg Sun papers.  Instead of providing an evidence-based opinion on any one of the prevalent food-related pathways to disease and sickness in Canada,  he chose to write about the “unknown liquid” that Anita Krajnc and other Toronto Pig Save activists had given to pigs on the day Dr. Krajnc was charged. It doesn’t appear that anyone believes that there were contaminants in the water the activists have given to the pigs before or since Anita’s arrest – apparently neither Fearman’s Pork nor Van Boekel Hog Farms believes this,  otherwise,  the animals would not have been slaughtered for food.  Neither does the CFIA apparently believe the pigs were contaminated,  since they issued no recall that I could find.  If there was the slightest belief that the water was poisoned,  the bottles would have been confiscated and the water tested.  To the best of my knowledge,  there was no economic loss resultant to the watering of the pigs and NO CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED.

The CFIA classifies recalls based on the level of health risk associated with the food product being recalled. High risk triggers include illness outbreaks,  food test results, inspection findings,  and consumer complaints.  In 2014 the Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued 714 recalls, following 467 recalls  in 2013 and 595 in 2012, Undeclared allergens (unlisted ingredients or product mislabeling) and microbial contaminations make up the majority of recalls,  according to Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, a professor at the University of Guelph’s Food Institute.

The Red Meat Condemnation report from Agriculture Canada provides a testament to the true brutality of both the transport and slaughter operations.  In 2015, 20,244,822 pigs were slaughtered,  and 7.02 pigs per thousand slaughtered were found dead on arrival at the slaughterhouse.  That amounts to 14,221 pigs.  Almost as many pigs were condemned on ante-mortem inspection for abscesses, peritonitis, arthritis, pneumonia, septicemia, emaciation, hepatitis, bruising, hernia, fracture, and many other conditions, suggesting that perhaps more were in very poor condition upon arrival at the slaugherhouse.  According to CFIA prosecution notices for that same year,  no one was convicted of anything as a result.

I hope our food scientists will continue to bring attention to serious risks in the food supply,  rather than trying to pick off the “low-hanging fruit” that are the protests at slaughterhouses.  I would like to propose that Dr. Warriner write an article condemning the abuse of transport and the risks of veterinary drug contamination with horse slaughter in Canada.  Certainly horse slaughter is not a closed system – non-farmers are dealing in drugged meat with false and incomplete EIDs, concealing incompetence and deceit, often at the highest levels.  In fact,  I plan to send him an email asking him to do exactly that.

Those activists who wish to expose inhumane farming practices and give water to animals enroute to slaughter are not terrorists. Dr. Warriner,  I cannot respect your attempts to try and criminalize activism.  Please respect the right of thoughtful citizens to express what they see as a moral outrage. Videos of activists providing water to pigs have mobilized a movement towards improving the quality of life of pigs, chickens, and cows.  In the absence of the animal welfare movement, there is an obvious race to the bottom.

 

When the news first broke that an outbreak of Listeriosis had resulted in the deaths of several Canadians, you might expect the minister responsible for food safety, to immediately step in, or at least take the matter seriously. Instead,  former Ag. Minister Gerry Ritz actually thought the whole matter rather funny, so much so that he immediately joked about the demise of the victims. Forget that it was under his watch – his funny bone was tickled and he wanted to share the feeling.

A look back at recent outbreaks and recalls in Canada,  courtesy of @Barfblog’s contributors, including Drs. Powell, Chapman, Hubbell and assorted food safety lecturers at Barfblog.com  – the unofficial internet gatekeepers on food-related illness and terrible reality cooking shows…

From toxic mothballs to blister beetles in food, there are no cautionary mentions of illness caused by the “tampering” of food by animal activists.

• Going Public:  London, Ontario Salmonella Spike
• Five Star Shellfish Inc. Brand Oysters Recalled In Canada Due to Salmonella
• People Are Sick From Histamine In Blue Marlin in Canada
• Raw Is Risky:  Canada Reports 1^st Case This Year of Illness Linked To Eating Raw Oysters
• Health Canada Proposes Rules for Veterinary  Drugs In Livestock
• Salmonella In Fresh Chili Peppers
• Frozen Berry Mix From Costco  Linked To Hepatitis A Exposure
• Raw Is Risky: 4 Sick With Salmonella Linked to Raw Pet Food
• People Are Sick, But Canada Won’t Say How Many:  Frozen Fruit Strikes Again
• 29 Sick, 2 Dead in Canada And US: Listeria In Dole Packaged Salads
• 18 Sickened:  Court OKs $4 Million Settlement Over E.Coli Beef Recall in Canada
• Seven Ill with Listeriosis in Canada: Prepackaged Leafy Greens Investigated
• 50% of Chicken Breast Campy Positive, Irrigation Water Source of Dangerous E.Coli: FoodNet Canada 2014 Short Report
• 91 Sick With Salmonella in Canada, “Poultry Products Are Food Items of Interest”
• Quinoa Salad Source of Illness in Canada
• People Are Sick:  Snap Peas Recalled in Canada Due To Cyclospora
• Salmonella Infantis; 8 Hospitalized
• Food Poisoning Sickens 80-100 Child Protection Employees in Brantford
• 31 Now Sick: Update On E.Coli 0157 Outbreak In Canada
• 81 Sick:  Vibrio Outbreak Linked To Raw Oysters
• E.Coli 0157 Outbreak Sickens At Least 24 People in Canada
• 476 Sick With Cyclosporiasis in US, 87 in Canada
• Mycobacterium Marinum Cluster Linked to Handling Shrimp in Canada
• Staph Toxin in French Roquefort Cheeses Leads To Recall
• Iron Cross Blister Beetles In Imported Pre-Packaged Leafy Vegetables in Canada
• Toxic Mothballs Mixed In With Candy In 1,100 Food Bank Hampers Handed Out in Canada
• Leaked Documents Contradict CFIA Claims, As Lilydale Recall Grows
• Costco Canada’s Fish Import License Suspended By CFIA
• Herring Recalled Because of Clostridium in Canada

 

Embryo Transfer – A Shadowy Market Ripe for Exploitation

Written by:  Heather Clemenceau

We’ve known for many years that farm animals have been exploited to produce more meat, milk, wool etc.  Embryo transfer in horses is another technology that is unrivalled for its inefficiency and costliness.  There’s also some evidence that embryo transfer (ET) is exploitative because it can be painful, requiring analgesics.  We recently read about the cast-off recipient mares (the “gestational” carriers that give birth to foals of a different mare/stallion) from the Arnold Reproduction Center  who were consigned to the Kaufman kill pen/kill buyer Mike McBarron for eventual slaughter.   Once exposed on social media platforms, veterinarian Leea Arnold responded:

“I recently sent some mares to the Cleburne Horse Sale.  I certainly never intended for them to end up in the slaughter pen. Many of these mares came to me through the sale barn system, were sick, completely unbroken and certainly destined for slaughter at that time (15 or so years ago). As long as these mares are reproductively sound, they stay in my herd – many probably longer than they are useful. My staff and I have taken the time, money, and resources we have to help these mares become useful and give them a viable purpose.

“I will use another avenue to re-home these mares in the future. If you are a non-profit organization and have your 501(c)3 at hand, I would be more than happy to donate any older or reproductively unsound recipients to your facilities as they become available.”

Dr. Arnold did not otherwise offer to help the animals that were scheduled to be sent for slaughter.

In addition to horses, mules are also being used in at least one euphemistically named “mule mom” program  using embryo transfers from gypsy vanner mares.  The Gypsy Gold breeding program  in Ocala Florida charges up to $14,000 for a purebred gypsy vanner foal carried by a mule, who is often shipped to and from the Gypsy Gold Horse Farm and the contractor of their service.  They also helpfully offer a service for purchasers of the gypsy foal who are not satisfied with the quality of their new purchase – they will connect you with an “appropriate buyer” – quite possibly the same buyer who will purchase the mule moms once their fertility wanes.  At the moment, this farm offers 11 mares for breeding, so one can only imagine how many times they are being flushed out and the number of “mule moms” that are being used as gestational carriers.

Currently, most equine breed associations permit embryo transfer. Notable exceptions include the Jockey Club (thoroughbreds), the United States Trotting Association, and the American Miniature Horse Association. Brazil and Argentina are currently the leaders in equine ET, although it’s believed that about 10,000 embryos were collected and transferred in the USA in 2014. The practice seems to have become more widespread in 2015, with more countries reporting embryo transfer activities, including Canada, South Africa, France, Poland, Switzerland, the USA, and Mexico.

Why is Equine Embryo Transfer Also A Welfare Issue?

Because veterinarians can only flush fertilized eggs (embryos) from the uterus of a donor mares at specific times the cycles of one or more recipient mares must be synchronized with the donor mare. This is why reproductive vet clinics tend to have a wide selection of recipient mares from which to choose. The number of mares that some vet clinics keep on hand for this purpose varies from dozens of mares to hundreds.   In many cases the donor mare is synchronized with two or more recipient mares in the event that multiple embryos are recovered from the donor mare.  Obviously,  these mares’ “jobs” come with no guarantee of a home placement after their careers are over and may easily fall into the wrong hands.

There are potential welfare issues for a donor mare, including those associated with the flushing procedure and with repeat injections to attempt to induce ovulation when used. Because more than two mares may be involved, the number of invasive rectal and ultrasound examinations is increased. Where recipient mare numbers are limited, greater pharmacological manipulation (often involving repeated injections) may also be used to achieve ovulatory synchronization between donor and recipient mares.

While there are apparently no studies on whether ET is painful in mares, it is known to be painful in other species, especially those in which embryo flushing is a surgical procedure. Perhaps because of this it is common practice to sedate mares both during flushing and ET.

Transvaginal ultrasound-guided follicular aspiration in women is known to be associated with pain, the severity of which is dependent upon needle design. In sheep and goats, repeated surgical egg retrieval has been associated with the development of adhesions. In a study of pony mares who were the subject of invasive follicular procedures, it was observed that heart rates and cortisol levels increased considerably as soon as a needle was introduced into the procedure.

Lastly, the development of the “super ovulation” protocol and the resulting production of more oocytes (cells that develop into an ovum/egg) will heighten the possibility of more foals using larger herds of recipient mares, greater numbers of horses born that aren’t needed,  and more slaughter after the recip mares are no longer required.

Drugs/Hormones  Commonly Used in Equine Reproduction Practices and Their Withdrawal Times

Sources for withdrawal times were the Meat Hygiene Manual of the CFIA or drug datasheets.  It is important to note that withdrawal times are often extended when drug

Most donor mares are sport horses, Arabians or Quarter Horses. It’s an appealing option for those who can afford it, since it allows the option of the owner taking their mare out of competition for only about a week in order to produce a foal.

combinations are used. Drugs used off-label in unapproved species may have differing withdrawal times even though appropriate dosage is given and whether used in combination with other drugs. The dose itself along with the frequency of use (repeated oral administrations can greatly extend withdrawal times) are two of the most important factors.  Compounded drugs (as opposed to generic or branded drugs sold OTC or through veterinarians) can vary widely in potency as well.  The amount of body fat, the breed, gender and health of the horse are also factors that affect kinetic decay of drugs.  Lastly, the amount of stress that the horse is subject to may also affect withdrawal times.  And even though a pharmacological effect on the animal may be over, the drug and its metabolites may still be detectable, and those metabolites may also be prohibited. The CFIA manual doesn’t tell anyone this, nor could they expect the lay horse person to understand any of the factors that also affect withdrawal times and drug tests,

Altrenogest/Progesterone/ Medroxyprogesterone (synthetic variant of hormone progesterone)

• Trade name: Regumate®, Depo-Provera® (medroxyprogesterone)
• Class of Drug: Hormone
• Use:   Clinical uses include synchronizing the ovulations of a donor mare with a specific recipient mare. It may also be used to alter or manipulate the estrous cycle of a mare for a scheduled breeding due to stallion availability.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition:  42 days withdrawal

Flunixin meglumine

• Trade Name: Banamine®
• Class of Drug: non-narcotic, nonsteroidal, analgesic agent with anti-inflammatory and antipyretic activity
• Use: Reduces moderate inflammation by stopping the formation of prostaglandins, which are mediators of inflammation.  They also reduce the formation of certain pain-causing products of inflammation.  Embryo recipients may receive flunixin meglumine i.v. at the time of transfer.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: IV – 10 days/IM 30 days

Vedaprofen

• Trade Name:  Quadrisol, VETRANAL^™
• Class of Drug: Analgesic, antipyretic and anti-inflammatory agent, Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, NSAID
• Use: For the control of inflammation and relief of pain associated with musculo-skeletal disorders and soft tissue injuries in horses
• CFIA Withdrawal Prohibition: 21 days (oral and IV)

Human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)

• Trade Name: Chorulon®
• Class of Drug: Gonadotropin releasing hormone or GnRH
• Use: Can also be administered to mares to accelerate ovulation selectively where needed to improve the degree of synchrony between the donor and recipient mares. Induces ovulation in mares. Induction of ovulation is advantageous if a mare is in a timed breeding, shipped semen, frozen semen or embryo transfer program.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition:  0 days

Deslorelin Acetate

• Trade Name: Ovuplant™ SucroMate™
• Class of Drug: Gonadotropin releasing hormone or GnRH
• Use: A potent, synthetic form of GnRH. The drug is administered as a subcutaneous implant.The most common use in a breeding program is the induction of a timed ovulation, such as when mares are being bred with cooled-transported semen or frozen semen
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition:  not on CFIA website but listed with a “WARNING: For use in horses (estrous mares) only. Do not use in horses intended for human consumption. For intramuscular (IM) use only. Do not administer intravascularly. Not for use in humans. Keep this and all drugs out of reach of children.”

Lidocaine Hydrochloride

• Trade Name: Lidoject, Lidocaine HCI 2% etc.
• Class of Drug: Local anesthetic and anti-arrhythmic agent.
• Use:  Skin block for sutures and implants
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: 7 days

Prostaglandins

• Trade Name: Lutalyse®, Prostin®, Estrumate®
• Class of Drug:  Fatty acid compounds with varying hormone-like effects
• Use: Prostaglandins are commonly administered to mares in a timed breeding program or after having missed a breeding opportunity to bring mares back into estrus. Prostaglandins are one of the most widely used hormones in equine reproduction.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: not on website, but listed elsewhere.  “must not be slaughtered for use in food for at least 2 days after the latest treatment with this drug.”

Domperidone

• Trade Name:  Equidone®
• Class of Drug: Dopamine antagonist. Neurotransmitter
• Use: Modulates or suppresses production of the hormone prolactin from the pituitary.  In breeding programs it stimulates lactation or the induction of lactation in nurse mares or the induction of follicular development. Also used as a preventative for fescue toxicosis.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: “no known manufacture for veterinary use in Canada”

Oxytocin

• Trade Name: OxoJect™, Oxytocin-S
• Class of Drug: Hormone
• Use: Administered to mares for evacuation of uterine fluid and treatment of retained placenta. It may also be used for induction of labor in late term mares and milk let-down.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: not on website: 0 days

eFSH

• Trade Name: FOLLTROPIN^®
• Class of Drug: Hormone
• Use: Facilitates “superovulation” – ovulating from more than one follicle at a time.  Development of a s protocol to superovulate mares would allow a top mare to produce several foals in a year, or to have several embryos frozen for later use. The hormone is extracted from porcine pituitary glands.
• CFIA Withdrawal/Prohibition: not on website but listed elsewhere.  “Treated animals must not be slaughtered for use in food for at least 10 days after latest treatment with this drug.”

 

The welfare of the animal is always compromised when greed is involved.  The ability for breeders to implant multiple embryos with no limits caters to the wealthy individuals in the industry.  While one might argue that ET is less risky than foaling for a mare,  horses should not have litters, especially since there is some question whether it is humane to repeatedly subject both recipient and donor mares to invasive procedures, after which many horses are dumped.  The worst  but hardly the only offender of this practice, the AQHA, allows multiple-embryo-transfer rules that facilitate overpopulation by allowing mares to have more than one foal per year. Rules about using frozen semen or eggs from long-sterile or dead animals  have allowed horses to breed from beyond the grave.  Consider that First Prize Dash,  a 1988 quarter horse mare – produced  44 offspring!  Her sire, Dash for Cash, sired 1,233 foals!  

It is also very doubtful  that either Canadian or Mexican slaughterhouses have tested for some of these lesser used or less obvious drugs or hormones.  Since some drugs/hormones are not even line items in the Meat Hygiene Manual, it would be easy for sellers of horses to plead ignorance of the requirement to disclose on an EID. Embryo transfer therefore facilitates  an already unsavory horsemeat industry in novel, previously unanticipated ways.