Passport query - authorised for slaughter??

[Bedford Joy]

Can anybody clarify something for me please?
My 11 year old TB ex racehorse broodmare was shipped to the UK at the age of 2 as she couldn't cope with racing. She has a German passport and the section at the back which states " the undersigned owner declares that the animal described in this Identification document is intended for slaughter for human consumption "
The breeder has signed this section, so does this mean he intended her to go to slaughter?
She came to the UK and was used as a broodmare for 7 years ( she is out of Big Shuffle)
Thanks

 

[Christsam]

It means that the particular owner at the time would allow the horse to be slaughtered for human consumption (probably due to being an ex racer and they could get more money if anything happened to her). You can just as easily get the part to say "not intended" signed.

 

[Bedford Joy]

Ok thank you looks like she had a lucky escape ... Can I cross out that part now as I am now her registered owner and definitely don't give my permission ?

 

[Christsam]

There should be another page that is the not intended one. each new owner is meant to sign to give their consent or not. I think you fill it in and it has to be stamped by you vet too. First thing i did was have mine changed Its only to do with the EU laws now that include horses as "human food". Im just pleased there is a section to say you dont want it to happen

 

[Bedford Joy]

Thank you so much Sam you've been really helpful

 

[Christsam]

No worries Stupid EU rules

 

[Spudlet]

Ok thank you looks like she had a lucky escape ... Can I cross out that part now as I am now her registered owner and definitely don't give my permission ?

You can, but what if for some reason you have to sell her on? She might end up in a situation where slaughter is the best option - euthanasia is expensive, and although you may plan to have her all her life, things can change and none of us can know the future. If it's a toss-up between humane slaughter or neglect or abandonment, slaughter is probably the better option for the horse - as long as there is not a needlessly long journey preceding it.

If one doesn't want to send a horse to slaughter, then answer is not to send it to slaughter - but slaughter is a valid option at the end of a horse's life, even if it's one that many people are a bit uncomfortable with.

 

[Christsam]

You can, but what if for some reason you have to sell her on? She might end up in a situation where slaughter is the best option - euthanasia is expensive, and although you may plan to have her all her life, things can change and none of us can know the future. If it's a toss-up between humane slaughter or neglect or abandonment, slaughter is probably the better option for the horse - as long as there is not a needlessly long journey preceding it.

If one doesn't want to send a horse to slaughter, then answer is not to send it to slaughter - but slaughter is a valid option at the end of a horse's life, even if it's one that many people are a bit uncomfortable with.

Each new owner is meant to sign to give their consent. So if the horse is sold on then then new owner gives their consent or not. And it doesnt meant euthanasia. It is consent for HUMAN consumption.

 

[Spudlet]

Each new owner is meant to sign to give their consent. So if the horse is sold on then then new owner gives their consent or not. And it doesnt meant euthanasia. It is consent for HUMAN consumption.

I know what it is, thank you. What does it matter, in a purely logical sense, what happens to the horse after it has died? Burying or cremating the horse may be the best thing for the people left behind, but it's not going to affect the horse's welfare one bit. What is best for the horse is that it has the most humane end possible. In some cases, slaughter may in fact be the only way that is going to happen. Few people would aspire for that, but the fact is that sometimes there is no other choice.

 

[Christsam]

I know what it is, thank you. What does it matter, in a purely logical sense, what happens to the horse after it has died? Burying or cremating the horse may be the best thing for the people left behind, but it's not going to affect the horse's welfare one bit. What is best for the horse is that it has the most humane end possible. In some cases, slaughter may in fact be the only way that is going to happen. Few people would aspire for that, but the fact is that sometimes there is no other choice.

alright, your question made it sound like you thought it was just about slaughter in general. no need to be so narky about it. maybe some people dont like the thought of eating horse or someone else eating their horse. Which, btw im not being hypocritical as i do not eat meat at all. the OP asked what it was, i answered and she said she would like to sign to say not intended. Why you have to bring up horses welfare in this i dont know.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

The fail safe option that means that under no circumstances can the horse enter the human food chain is to stick a needle in it and pump it full of penecilin, steroids, phynadine, sedative or any other drug with a withdrawal period, the day before it is slaughtered.

 

[Christsam]

The fail safe option that means that under no circumstances can the horse enter the human food chain is to stick a needle in it and pump it full of penecilin, steroids, phynadine, sedative or any other drug with a withdrawal period, the day before it is slaughtered.

That is also a good way of doing it. lol

 

[Star_Chaser]

Sorry but the thought of eating horse meat makes me want to retch. I did by accident in spain and didn't like the taste. I wouldn't eat dog either. I'm not fuddy duddy about meat but there are somethings I'd like to personally keep sacred and off my dinner plate.

 

[newera]

You can, but what if for some reason you have to sell her on? She might end up in a situation where slaughter is the best option - euthanasia is expensive, and although you may plan to have her all her life, things can change and none of us can know the future. If it's a toss-up between humane slaughter or neglect or abandonment, slaughter is probably the better option for the horse - as long as there is not a needlessly long journey preceding it.

If one doesn't want to send a horse to slaughter, then answer is not to send it to slaughter - but slaughter is a valid option at the end of a horse's life, even if it's one that many people are a bit uncomfortable with.

This section is intended to regulate slaughter for human consumption, and has no effect on slaughter for any other reason, or to any other end. Whenever I've bought horses and am changing my name to the owner, I have my vet stamp the page confirming that my horses are not intended for human consumption.

 

[FfionWinnie]

If the horse is sold on it would be up to the new owner anyway so it's pretty irelevant what you do with the writing there.

 

[fatpiggy]

If the horse has been put down by injection or wormed within the last month it can't go for consumption anyway.

 

[flaxen]

Taken from VMD

List of prohibited substances:

Aristolochia spp (and preparations thereof)
Chloramphenicol
Chloroform
Chlorpromazine
Colchicine
Dapsone
Dimetridazole
Metronidazole
Nitrofurans (including Furazolidone)
Ronidazole
Phenybutazone

Horses which have been treated with these must not enter the food chain, and their passports must be signed at part II of section IX to indicate that the animal is not intended for human consumption. This is an irreversible decision.

 

[piebaldsparkle]

I know what it is, thank you. What does it matter, in a purely logical sense, what happens to the horse after it has died?

It matters as it affects the drugs that can be used on the horse.

For example the horse could not be prescribed Bute without the section being signed to say the horse WILL NOT go for human consumption.

 

[helen75]

Does anyone here realise that if your horse ends up at Potters for example and you have signed the 'not intended for HC' section, that they cab still shoot it but the carcass gets thrown in the bin with any potentially contaminated cows/pigs etc ?? The signature will not stop the slaughter - it will simply stop the carcass entering the food chain.

 

[piebaldsparkle]

Does anyone here realise that if your horse ends up at Potters for example and you have signed the 'not intended for HC' section, that they cab still shoot it but the carcass gets thrown in the bin with any potentially contaminated cows/pigs etc ?? The signature will not stop the slaughter - it will simply stop the carcass entering the food chain.

yes well aware of that fact - However it does mean whilst alive the horse can be offered the more effective drugs and not just the ones approved by the EU for use on animals for human consumption.

 

[hoggedmane]

This section has to be completed before a vet can administer a lot of drugs to prevent then entering the human food chain. My vet has always checked this is signed at the first visit to a new horse.

 

[Christsam]

Does anyone here realise that if your horse ends up at Potters for example and you have signed the 'not intended for HC' section, that they cab still shoot it but the carcass gets thrown in the bin with any potentially contaminated cows/pigs etc ?? The signature will not stop the slaughter - it will simply stop the carcass entering the food chain.

Yes very well aware of that fact too. The OP simply wondered if that section meant the horse was intended for human comsumption or not and can she change it.