Anti-horse slaughter calls, e-mails flood Legislature

| Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Previous Page

Share

• del.icio.us
• Digg
• NewsVine
• Fark

Print

Email

Bill Harlan, Journal staff

PIERRE -- A bill promoting horse slaughtering in South Dakota died in committee Tuesday morning, but not before lawmakers sounded off about the hundreds of e-mails and telephone calls they received from out-of-state opponents.

Sen. Frank Kloucek, D-Scotland, introduced SB170, which would have allowed up to $1 million in state economic development loans to establish a horse-slaughtering plant.

"I'm offended," Sen. Tom Hansen, R-Huron said, but not by Kloucek's bill.

Hansen addressed out-of-staters who were listening to the committee hearing on the Internet. "I'm not angry, I'm just plain offended that you have used these types of tactics."

Hansen said he was happy to hear from South Dakotans, but he added, "We don't look to you outsiders to tell us what to do."

The Animal Welfare Institute, a nonprofit group based in Washington, D.C., listed on its Web site the phone numbers for all nine members of the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.

The institute also took out a full-page ad in the Pierre Capitol Journal on Tuesday. The ad quoted Arvol Looking Horse, a Lakota spiritual leader, saying "Stop the slaughter of America's horses."

The institute's Web side suggested "talking points" for e-mails and phone calls, among them:

* "South Dakota would be out of step with public sentiment if the state legislature passes S.B. 170 into law and this will reflect unfavorably on the state."

* "The overwhelming majority of horses they would slaughter come from other states, including stolen horses and horses sold under false pretenses."

* "South Dakota could find itself with a slaughterhouse that cannot operate due to federal funding restrictions" because the institute predicts Congress will pass the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act.

Sen. Jay Duenwald, R-Hoven, who is chairman of the committee, said he received 150 phone calls Monday while he was on the Senate floor. He received more than 1,000 e-mails Monday and another 400 or 500 Tuesday. "I didn't pay any attention to them," he said.

Duenwald said all but three of the messages he did read opposed the legislation. (The supporters were from South Dakota.)

Hansen said the ad, the e-mails and the phone calls would have no effect on lawmakers, though he invited the group to buy more. "That's very good for our newspaper industry in South Dakota," he said.

Before the committee discussed the bill, Kloucek offered an amendment to instead defer the issue to a summer study committee.

"I'm sorry for all the negative e-mails you got from these people from out of state," Kloucek told fellow committee members. He called the Animal Welfare Institute's claims "absolute baloney."

Kloucek also defended his proposal to process horse meat. "There's a market for it and a need for it," he said.

There are currently no horse-processing plants in the United States. State laws banning horse slaughtering in Texas and Illinois closed the last three processing plants in U.S. "As a result of that, we've had more neglect and more problems," Kloucek said. Humane societies are "overwhelmed" with horses no one can care for, he said.

Kloucek said the products from horse-processing plants could provide food and other products for cosmetics, medical products and research.

State officials, however, testified against the bill.

Mike Youngberg of the Governor's Office of Economic Development said it was unnecessary to authorize economic-development money for horse-processing plants because they could already qualify for help if they met other criteria.

Amber Brady of the state Department of Agriculture said the state opposes a ban on horse slaughtering, but the department also opposes the bill, in part because there are no federal inspectors for horse-processing plants.

Brady also warned that recent court cases and legislation pending in Congress make it uncertain whether horse slaughtering will even be legal in the United States.

"SB170 is not the answer," Brady said,

The committee rejected the amended version of the bill that called for a summer study after Sen. Ken McNenny, R-Sturgis, pointed out that summer studies traditionally are appointed by the Legislature's executive committee near the end of the legislative session.

However, members of the agriculture committee did not reject horse slaughtering "It's important that we seek to find a solution to what should be done with horses the owner can't afford to care for," Hansen said.

The Animal Welfare Institute did not have a representative at the meeting.

Dick Gregerson, a lobbyist for the United States Humane Society, attended the hearing but did not speak. Gregerson later told The Associated Press: "There's something repulsive about slaughtering horses for human consumption because horses aren't raised for that purpose. It just goes against the American grain."

Kloucek argued the opposite. "We should have horse slaughtering in the United States," he said. "My father and many of your fathers in World War Two and One did eat this product, as soldiers, defending our freedom here in America."

Contact Bill Harlan at 394-8424 or at bill.harlan@rapidcityjournal.com