Schuette2that this topic has risen to the surface again. (Whitcomb, 2012) Many famousorganizations and people have stated their opinion on this issue, but it is stilldifficult to know who to believe. How can their statements about a subject be soopposing? Analyzing sources, and not just information, will uncover the motivebehind the writers and help determine how different groups can create suchdifferent claims.The first case, presented by the Animal Welfare Institute, (AWI) is that horse-slaughtering is simply inhumane. In the
, Christopher Heyde portraysth
e Animal Welfare Institute’s
toward horse slaughter in his article “Putting anEnd to the Cruel Practice of Horse Slaughter”
The AWI (Animal Welfare Institute)
states that it has “
long fought against the cruel and inhumane conditions withinlivestock
slaughterhouses.” And so it makes complete sense that they would bestanding up for the horses when they can’t speak for themselves.
They voice that since horses are not raised for consumption in America,proper regulations and oversight do not exist. The article goes on to describe apersonal tour of a horse slaughtering plant and the cruelties that befell theseanimals.
According to Heyde’s account the horses came to the plant in improper
transportation, and were mistreated from the moment they came out of the trailer,
the mandatory USDA inspector wasn’t even on site.
However, from his account it is hard to tell if this event really occurred. Hegives no identification regarding which slaughtering facility he visited. Horseslaughtering facilities also rarely open their doors for outsides, so if this event istrue, it is also hard to believe that workers would be indecent to the horses when a