EDITORIAL

[Merryben@aol.com]

Okay, I will try this again.  Of course I have now lost a lot of my original
momentum.  The following is what I wrote concerning an editorial entitled
"HORSES ARE PETS?  WELL, THEY'RE MOSTLY LIVESTOCK -- VOTE NO ON PROP 6".  This
was published in their editorials on Wednesday, October 7, 1998.  Their e-mail
is letters@sjmercury.com and their snail mail is 750 Ridder Park Drive, San
jose CA  95190.  I found their callous disregard for horses horrible.  Plus,
they made responsible horse owners sound like idiots.  I also found this
article to be extremely offensive and condescending, etc.  I would like to see
you guys from California write the Mercury and tell them their reasoning
stinks.....I did not have space to quote the whole article but the parts of my
letter in quotes are exactly as the Mercury wrote them.   They also ended by
saying "If it matters to the proponents of Proposition 6, let them buy all the
horses and find homes for them."  Maryben

To the Mercury News:

I find I must respond to the recent editorial advocating a no vote on
Proposition 6.  Obviously this subject was not researched well at all by your
writer.  In addition, I found it to be one of the most insensitive, cruel and
condescending writings I have seen in a long time. Your statement that "the
proponents of Proposition 6 propose that all sick , old or unwanted horses be
allowed to live out their last days in a pasture" is totally wrong.
Responsible horse owners are not idiots, unlike the writer of this article,
and we know that while a nice idea, it is totally unworkable.  

I could write pages about every point in this article however will stick to
the worst of your mistakes.  It does not cost hundreds of dollars to euthanize
a large animal.  It will usually cost less than $100.00 including the cost of
having the rendering works haul the body away and less if you deliver the
animal to them. You also erroneously stated that the new law would make
"felons out of horse owners who sell to the wrong buyer."  The truth is that
it would make it a misdemeanor to sell horsemeat for human consumption.  The
felons would be the people who are breaking the law by receiving, possessing
and transporting these animals for human consumption.  You are right that
there are regulations regarding the transport of horses, however, these
regulations are not enforced.  The profit is worth the small risk in getting
caught breaking a few regulations.  One of the problems is not the legal
owners selling animals but the great deal of horse stealing that goes on.  It
is extremely hard to track down an animal once it has been stolen.  One of my
friends was lucky and found her horses after taking a week off work and
spending most of it on the telephone.  Another friend whose mare and foal were
stolen was not so lucky.  She found her horse at the slaughterhouse in Texas
but they refused to return the animals. 

Your writer admits that "horses bound for slaughter are often mistreated.
They are crowded into trucks designed for smaller animals, unable to raise
their heads.  They are trucked for days without food or water to plants in
Texas, Nebraska or Canada."  You seem to find nothing wrong with this, stating
that "it doesn't matter to the horse whether it's buried, rendered or
sauteed."  I am sure it doesn't but it darn well matters to them if they are
tortured for days prior to arriving at the slaughterhouses, sick and almost
insane with hunger, thirst and fear.  I have seen the videotapes and would
suggest that your writer try looking at them.

Passing this proposition would not hurt anyone, the fiscal impact is minimal
and it just might save some animals from a horrible fate.