Vince Garreffa, Animal Rights Activist?

Surely a butcher can't be an animal rights activist? I wouldn't think so, but in this interview with FoodDesigner Linda Monique from Melbourne, "Celebrity Butcher" Vince Garreffa is certainly trying to come across as someone who is deeply concerned about horse welfare.

I'm certainly left dizzy by the mishmash of ideas he seems to be putting forward. Please watch this, and tell me... is he really claiming that he's going to save thoroughbreds from extinction by eating them? Or stop brumbies being shot from helicopters by selling the meat of domesticated horses in his shop?

I agree that stricter regulations are required, but I disagree on so many other points, many of which he's brought in randomly, seemingly to muddy the waters... My detailed response is below the video.

Here's the link to watch the video on YouTube.

So to respond to a few of the key points he makes (skipping over some of the smaller stuff, because this post is already too long...):

Vince Garreffa - "...this meat is produced, not to West Australian standards, but it's produced to Australian standards, ok? In a proper abattoir that does my beef, my lamb, my pork. So for the first time ever we've got horse meat that is produced to the highest standards in this country made available to its citizens."

To start off with, I don't know how you can talk about using "the highest standards" when there are no standards. Horse meat has only just been made legal for Aussies to eat, and as such, any food safety standards must have only just been written. If you're referring to the export standards, then they're not very high standards at all. The European Union, who have been consuming horse meat for a very long time, have just brought in new standards due to health concerns. The EU now require that horses are individually tracked, with a complete veterinary history following each horse throughout its life. This is something that definitely does not happen in Australia. So it would appear that "the highest standards" fall short of the EU's standards, which begs the question: if Australian horse meat isn't good enough for the EU, why is it suddenly good enough for Australians?

VG - "We would rather have all these wild horses that have been distributed throughout this country, shot from a helicopter, drop dead on the ground and rot, than kill them humanely. The moment a meat becomes worthy of human consumption everybody wants to protect it."

Who would rather that? I doubt very much you could find one sane person who would admit to preferring inhumane over humane. That is, assuming that you can find a humane slaughter technique for horses.

Approximately 20% of the horses slaughtered for export are wild horses, known in Australia as brumbies. According to the governments in charge of brumby culls from helicopters, these culls are only carried out when the horses cannot be captured, due to reasons such as difficult terrain or isolation. If you want to find out more, please see the websites of the various brumby welfare and rescue groups on the contact page.

Yes, there are huge problems with brumby management in Australia, but I fail to see how a butcher selling horse meat derived from domesticated horses is really going to be a step forward for them. I do appreciate the mention though, as more people need to be aware of how unsustainable current brumby management strategies are.

VG - "So I'm thinking what I've created, is a conscience, of making sure we discuss this issue, that we start humanely treating... It costs about $500 to bury a horse. In England they won't allow you to bury a horse without a license, because when you bury a 500 kilo horse you can contaminate the water table. And so all of a sudden people are hiding horses, by shooting them illegally, and burying them in lots of places. Ok? And I'm saying here we are that we could say, "hey stop mistreating 'em, start looking after them, treat them well, they're a valuable commodity.""

This is a muddled line of thought indeed, so I have transcribed it in full... Firstly, while yes, you have brought horse welfare to national, mainstream media attention, something that no horse welfare or rescue group has been able to do, you haven't "created... a conscience". What you have done is increase awareness. Unfortunately your method of doing so leaves a lot to be desired, effective as it may be.

Grandiose claims aside... why is the English situation relevant? Yes, it is expensive to get a horse buried or cremated, but people aren't "hiding horses" or "shooting them illegally" in Australia. Last time I looked, Australia was a whole lot bigger than England, with a considerably smaller population. Obfuscation, anyone?

Debates about whether you can really call burying a dead horse "mistreating" it, and consuming it "respecting" it, I shall leave well alone.

VG - "...everyone will talk to you about the fact that to save old breeds of anything, pork is a classic case, all the old breeds of pork, all the old breeds of beef, all the old breeds of anything, have been saved only when they're eaten, because when they're eaten it keeps them safe... from, from extinction!"

Wow, "old breeds of anything"? Better tell the Rare Breeds Network at once! Those dog breeders will be thrilled!

I think you'll find that you've just listed rare breeds of pork and beef. Sure, they may have been saved by people wanting to eat them, but that's the reason they were selectively bred in the first place. Horses are quite different, and I think you'll find that thoroughbreds are in no danger of extinction. Quite the opposite in fact. Which we'll get to in a moment.

Anyone breeding a rare breed of horse in Australia, is not doing so in order for people to eat them. I'm sure they would be quite horrified at such a suggestion.

VG - "So I think it's been quite an unbelievable little "ride" that's happened the last few weeks, and the protesters have hurt quite a few restaurants, but there's no way in the world I can change... the business that I'm in, and I'm only doing what is legal."

Yes, by getting the law changed, so that you not only have legalised a new meat, but have a monopoly on its sale. To claim you couldn't have changed that, maybe by not doing it in the first place, is a bit far fetched.

Any business that gets involved with controversial issues that people feel strongly about can't really claim to be all that surprised when people share their strong opinions. To my knowledge, there has been one protest at a Melbourne restaurant, which has since made it clear that it will not serve horse again. Other than that I only know of people contacting restaurants by email and other means, to let them know of their displeasure, to outline their concerns, and state their unwillingness to dine there ever again if horse meat is put on the menu. Surely it is standard practice for restaurants to adjust their menu in response to whether their customers like it or not? This is an unusual case, sure, but the owners of these restaurants can't pretend they didn't know that putting horse meat on the menu would be controversial.

And to be honest, the horse puns aren't helping...

VG - "I feel for people that find it hard to seperate the pet, and the meat, because there's no way in the world that there isn't probably ten thousand young kids out there have got pet lambs on farms, and they know that lambs go and get slaughtered, but they don't want their pet going to get slaughtered, and that's fine! I'm not out looking for people's pets. All I'm out there looking for is clean horses, without drugs, that are destined for the knackeries, that I can agist for a few months, get the all clear from the health department, fatten them up, and turn them into a commodity that deserves respect. Instead of them rotting on the ground somewhere, or being used by dog and cat food."

I hope you're looking very thoroughly indeed for these "clean horses". Does the health department blood test them? There's no system for tracking drugs given to horses in Australia, and horses "destined for the knackeries" are hardly going to have thorough veterinary records kept on them.

Are you simply taking the previous owner's word for it that they're clean? If the person you're buying them from didn't breed the horses, then they can't say for sure, as they'd have no idea what the horse may have been given prior to them owning it. If a horse is from a large breeding operation, how confident is the owner that none of the staff looking after the horses gave the horse anything? When giving drugs to horses, people tend to consider things such as the horse's health and whether it will be tested for drugs at the races or other competitions. There's no way that people would have been looking after these horses with slaughter for human consumption in mind, because it was only made legal in WA a month ago.

With no government regulation in place to track horses' identities, let alone their veterinary records, risks to human health can not be ruled out.

I guess now we see why the horse meat in your shop is considerably more expensive than the price it gets for export. Agisting and fattening up the horses yourself can't be cheap.

VG - "...all the best trainers in this country will tell you that they need to close a blind eye to what's going on, because they need for their excess horses to be gotten rid of somehow. It has been known, it has been known, that great champions that nobody wants anymore, when they no longer race, have finished up at knackeries. Because no-one wants to feed them anymore. That's an industry that will on one hand tell me that I'm inhumane in killing a lovely animal, and on the other hand is allowing ten to twenty thousand horses a year... be unwanted... and let's just get rid of them behind closed doors, and let's pick on Vince Gareffa, but not wake up to the fact that we need some good rules and regulations for horses going to the, the pet factory, they should be treated with respect, and if they're valuable as a food commodity, you see how many more horses end up with a better life."

To say that horses owners are ALL condoning what goes on is pretty insulting. Lumping all Australian horse people in together is pretty convenient for your argument, but unfortunately it doesn't accurately portray the "horse industry" in Australia.

The non-racing section of the horse owning public is huge, but how is the average Aussie with a horse supposed to put a stop to the excesses of the big business of racing, with their huge earnings and considerable lobbying power?

To illustrate this in a way that non-horsey people will be able to more easily understand, let's substitute dogs for horses for a moment. How many dog owners do you know who are not happy about the thousands of perfectly healthy dogs being euthanised in shelters each year because they can't find a home? About racing greyhounds being put to sleep because they're not fast enough?

What is the average dog owner supposed to do about the huge number of dogs being bred by irresponsible people?

If all of the problems in an industry haven't been solved, that doesn't mean everyone is happy for there to be problems!

I agree wholeheartedly that much stricter regulations are required, both on horse breeding and on the procedures at knackeries. I think you'll find that the many horse welfare and rescue groups operating in this country agree on that particular point, if you take the time to ask them.

Mr Garreffa, to put it plainly, you can't claim that people don't care about the tens of thousands of horses being sent to slaughter each year, just because no-one has approached you directly to talk about the issues prior to you selling the meat in your shop.

Vince Garreffa - "RSPCA's happy with us!"

Linda Monique - "RSPCA? Have approved? Yes?"

Vince Garreffa - "They are happy, because of the fact that they only worry about when the horse is alive, and when they know my story, they realise that I'm making the life of the horses destined for the table a much happier one for the last few months."

Have they overseen the slaughter of the horses in question? Have they undertaken to ensure that the abattoir workers in what is clearly a non-horse abattoir, are trained in the handling of horses? That the facilities are appropriate for horses?

I'm interested to find out about this claim of RSPCA approval. I'll see what I can find out, and share my findings in a future blog post.

In summary, I'm glad to see this interview in an unedited form, where Mr Garreffa has been allowed to basically ramble through his diverse "arguments". Seen in context, it's easy to see that he is even more misguided on many aspects of this issue than I had originally thought.

But we agree on one thing. Horse welfare in Australia is in a very sorry state indeed, and in desperate need of attention. For those who have made it to the end of this very long blog post, please see "How you can help" for simple things that any concerned person can do to help Australian horses.

Your Questions Answered #3

This post is in response to a twitter exchange with someone asking for question suggestions for an interview with butcher Vince Garreffa.

My answers unfortunately don't fit into 140 characters or less, but I shall endeavour to keep them brief!

The Twitter exchange so far:

Them - Interviewing Vince from Mondo Butchers to clarify why he sells horse meat. What are some things you want me to ask?

Me @them - would love to know his thoughts on the rational argument against consuming Oz horse meat:http://tinyurl.com/292npx5 :)

Me @them - Oh, and I'm very interested in what screening/food safety procedures the govt made him follow, re: drugs in horses :)

Them - Interview with Vince from Mondo butchers will be posted on Youtube tonight. Was a real eye opener! some of the facts...

Them - Horse meat he sells has been approved by the RSPCA, yet Vince is banned from sellling horse burgers at the Truffle Fest on Saturday

Them - @DontEatAusHorse He has an extensive list of screening procedures at the same abattoir he gets his lamb, beef. Screened for steroids

Them - @DontEatAusHorse 60-70,000 horses are being shipped out of Oz to JAP, HOLL, GER, FRA, BEL for consumption...so why can't a butcher sell?

Firstly, I'm looking forward to the Youtube video. Hopefully you've been able to go into greater depth than the mainstream media has so far.

Regarding the RSPCA approval, has the RSPCA specifically looked into the slaughter of the horses at the abattoir he is using? I'm very interested to learn more about this, as there are no abattoirs in Western Australia specifically set up for horses. The only two horse abattoirs in Australia are the two Belgian owned export facilities in South Australia and Queensland. (To clarify - horse abattoirs are different to knackeries that slaughter horses for pet food, fertiliser, etc.)

The Truffle Festival decided to ask Vince not to sell horse meat at the festival because they were concerned about people protesting there. An understandable decision by the organisers, as they wish to hold a successful event, not one disrupted by protesters.

I would love to see the list of screening procedures. Glad to hear they were screened for steroids. I'm hoping they were screened for other things also, particularly Phenylbutazone. I understand that the limited scope of Twitter may have prevented you from listing further substances, so I look forward to seeing more in the Youtube video.

The well worn argument of "it's good enough for people overseas, so it's good enough for Aussies" would no doubt be quite valid if it were true. New food safety measures being brought in for the European Union on July 31st 2010 will exclude Australian horse meat from their dinner tables, because in the EU they have stringent health standards for tracing prohibited substances in the meat, something which Australia does not do.

You listed France, Germany, The Netherlands and Belgium among the countries importing Australian horse meat. They will all be affected by the new health standards for horse meat in the EU.

You can read about the European Union's standards for residues in horses from third countries in detail here.

I will post more from this document later, but here are some of the key requirements of third countries exporting horse meat to the EU that definitely impact on Australian exports:

"Equine animals intended for food production should be identified and a system of identity verification should be established.

Treatment records. The purpose of recording treatments of animals with veterinary medicinal products is to ensure that animals are not slaughtered within the withdrawal period of the medicine in question, thus providing guarantees that the EU Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) for the particular pharmacologically active substance is respected. In the EU stock farmers are required to keep medicines records. On that basis it is expected that treatments with veterinary medicinal products should be recorded on a document linked to and accompanying the identified animal when moving from one premise to another or to the slaughterhouse (food chain information)."

Currently in the EU:

"Any horse in the EU treated with phenylbutazone must be excluded from the food chain and be signed out of the food chain in the equine passport."

Australia has no system for registering horses, definitely no system for tracking medications given to horses, and Phenylbutazone is one of the most common drugs that is used here.

Australian horse meat is NOT "good enough" for people in Europe, who have been consuming horse meat for a very long time, and therefore know a bit more about the health risks. From this it is fairly easy to conclude that it is also NOT "good enough" for Australians.

The figure of 60-70,000 horses being exported is disturbingly large, and I'd be very interested to know the source of that figure. A study published in 2008 has the following to say about the number of horses slaughtered in Australia for export markets:

"The number of horses slaughtered has been estimated from data collected from Ramsay (1994) and has dropped from over 30,000 in the late 1990’s to the current levels of approximately 11,000 – 13,000 horses per annum."

Source - RSPCA knowledgebase report, Amanda Doughty 2008, from the School of Animal Studies and The Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics The University of Queensland, Gatton. The full report (thesis) is available in PDF format here (file size 1.26mb.)

Another figure that I've seen quoted is 40,000 horses per year. It is very difficult to accurate information on this. The government collects the figures, how about they start making them publicly available?

I hope that has covered everything. Sorry if it's a bit on the long side, but I believe it is important to be thorough!

Once again, I am happy to answer all questions, so keep them coming. Comment on the blog, or send me a tweet @donteataushorse

Addressing Specific Misconceptions #1 - Horses are not "reared" for human consumption in Australia

I discovered this article today on the subject of the legalisation of horse meat for human consumption in Australia.

"The rearing of horse for human consumption in Australia has been met with contention recently despite the fact it has been done since the 1970s."

The use of "rearing" in this article is incredibly misleading to those who are unfamiliar with how the industry works.

Domesticated horses that are slaughtered for export markets are NOT reared for this purpose. These horses end up at the abattoirs because there are simply not enough homes out there for them. The majority of these horses are bred for racing, with tens of thousands of thoroughbreds and standardbreds discarded to slaughter each year.

Horse slaughter is an industry that is the direct result of excessive overbreeding.

Anyone attempting to make money by "rearing" horses for human consumption would soon find it to be an incredibly unprofitable venture.

The costs of rearing a horse for even the first two years of its life, plus the upkeep of the mare while she 's carrying the foal for 11 months, are more than the money you would get for it as meat, even if only the basic needs of survival are met. In the incredibly unlikely event of the sale price being more than the cost of rearing the horse, the tiny profit margin would not be worth the effort involved.

Selling horses to slaughter is only profitable when people pick up unwanted horses very cheaply, or for free, and sell them very quickly so they do not have to pay for much upkeep. Abattoirs pay for horses by weight, and one of the reasons there is an export market at all is that the meat is cheap.

Quality horses can easily fetch thousands of dollars, and will always be worth much more sold for purposes other than slaughter. Anyone involved in breeding horses who is not aiming to produce quality is "doing it wrong".

The horses slaughtered for Vince Garreffa in Western Australia were definitely not "reared" for slaughter. Or at least they shouldn't have been, seeing as the sale of horse meat for human consumption was illegal until a week ago. The breeder/s of these horses have clearly failed in their attempts to breed saleable prospects for a more profitable horse buying market.

The second misconception raised by this article is that people have suddenly decided to have a problem with horse slaughter because it is legal to sell horse meat in WA... As if the export industry has been given the thumbs up by everyone in Australia, merely by the fact that it exists.

I assert that this is an artificial impression due to the issue only just having made it to the mainstream media. There are people out there who have been working hard to raise awareness of many horse welfare issues for many years. The fact that they have not been on the radar of journos can be compared to other animal welfare issues, which rarely make it into the media.

How many average Aussies had given thought to the goings on at pig farms until sow stalls were brought to their attention? How long after battery cages became widely known about, did it take for free range eggs to become popular, or even available for purchase?

It is only when people are given information about what is going on that they are in any position to have an opinion on it. Any industry that relies on unpleasant things happening to animals is not going to go out of their way to publicise their activities, and politicians are not going to legislate to improve matters for the animals involved until the wider public is aware of the situation and start to show that they are displeased with it.

The wider issues of horse welfare are now a little closer to being "on the radar" since horse meat went on sale in WA, but until journalists themselves become a little more aware of the reality of the situation, it looks like we're going to see more frustrating articles such as this one.

Wow, an Interview with Someone who isn't a Butcher...

Amongst the sensational media coverage of the Western Australian horse meat "scandal", I've finally found a half decent interview where the journo has spoken with someone opposed to horse slaughter in Australia.

Click here to listen or here to read the transcript of an ABC news interview, first with butcher Vince Gareffa, then with Glenys Oogjes from Animals Australia.

One of the excellent points that Glenys raises is that those who are concerned about this should be looking to the source - the overbreeding of horses, particularly by the thoroughbred and standardbred racing industries who breed twenty to thirty thousand foals each year with only a fraction even making it to the track. This is known as "wastage", and you can read more about the problem in the article "What is horse 'wastage' in the racehorse industry?" on the RSPCA knowledgebase website.

In the interview, Ms Oogjes tells of how she has personally been to the abattoir in South Australia (Peterborough) where horses are slaughtered for export. She then goes on to say that Animals Australia is opposed to adding any more animal species to our plates.

Unfortunately she does not cover the specifics of the two key issues that I believe need to be addressed by the export industry and the WA State Government. Perhaps they are just too complex to get across in a brief interview? Perhaps we still need the media to interview someone who is aware of the specific issues relating to horses...

On a different note, in this interview the point is raised that Mr Garreffa will only have about 20 horses slaughtered each year. "Small potatoes" indeed when compared to the tens of thousands slaughtered for export, but surely he won't be allowed to hold such a monopoly on the horse meat market if it becomes established? If the sale of horse meat becomes a normal everyday thing in WA, surely there will be other butchers in all states who will also wish to follow suit, resulting in many more healthy young Aussie horses being slaughtered.

Clearly this issue is of national concern, and those who are opposed to it cannot afford to become apathetic.

Regarding Mr Vince Garreffa, "Celebrity Butcher"

If anyone can spot a "media tart" when they see one, it's me. I lived in Brisbane when Peter Beattie was premier. Enough said.

One thing is clear, the media LOVE this guy. At this point Mr Vince Garreffa has done many interviews with various media outlets. In many of which his opinion is the only one put forward, such as this lovely interview from ABC online.

Don't get me wrong, he raises some good points and has done a lot for bringing the issue of horse slaughter to the mainstream media. However, it is frustrating that a "celebrity butcher" is dominating the conversation, and many of his claims are not exactly accurate. (I will be addressing some of the points he has raised in future posts.) Call me a hopeless optimist if you will, but I'm going to put a little faith in the media, that we will soon see a sensible journalist out there get in contact with someone with an opposing viewpoint. Such as Second Chance Horse Rescue from Western Australia (their media release on the WA horse meat issue is covered in this blog post).

This situation illustrates a huge part of the problem with horse welfare in Australia, and the reason why so many have been unaware of the scale of horse slaughter up until now. While there are horse rescue and welfare groups out there made up of hardworking volunteers, they are spread far and wide, and are clearly not as well equipped to deal with the mainstream media as Mr Garreffa, who has established media contacts from his many appearances.

I had not been aware of Mr Garreffa until now, but he clearly loves the spotlight. For those who are also new to this guy, a quick google shows that he makes regular appearances on 6PR882, The West, ABC Esperance, Spice Magazine, SBS, Scoop Online, 3AW and the Today show.

On Perth ABC Radio 720ABC he is apparently "Afternoon's very own butcher" (hate to tell you Gillian O'Shaughnessy, pretty sure he's not your "very own"!)

Mr Garreffa obviously knew that there would be a backlash against him for this, and he's had plenty of time to prepare his media strategy. Welfare groups and horse lovers found out about this after the Agriculture minister Terry Redman had already given the green light, and have been scrambling to catch up ever since.

So a request to the media... please do some research on this, and don't let your loyalty to a popular media figure cloud your judgement. This is not a case of "lovable Perth man vs crazy animal rights activists", there are serious issues that need to be investigated. (Click here for a basic overview of the rational argument against the consumption of Australian horses.)

Article in The West does not address the real issues

The West published an article on their website this morning about the anti horse meat backlash... unfortunately they've focussed on animal rights activists instead of the real concerns of those of us willing to engage in reasonable debate about this!

Human health risks? No mention... Animal welfare concerns in the slaughter process? No mention... Someone ringing up and mentioning "Underbelly"? Well of course that got in there...

Who would expect such a thing from a newspaper... Hmmm... Oh dear, so easy to be cynical...

Link to the story: "Threats over horse meat sales"

Media Release from Second Chance Horse Rescue

Here is the official media release from Second Chance Horse Rescue regarding the current situation in Western Australia. Second Chance are a horse welfare and rescue organisation who operate in WA.

Second Chance Horse Rescue Inc – Media Statement - Slaughter of Horses for human consumption in Western Australia – July 2010

Second Chance Horse Rescue is a not for profit organisation dedicated to the welfare of horses in Western Australia. Second Chance is opposed to the slaughter of horses for human consumption and urges the State Government to remove the horse as a declared animal under the Western Australian Meat Industry Authority Act 1976 (WA).

Second Chance has reached this position for the following reasons:
1. Concern for Animal Welfare

a. Slaughter of horses
Second Chance is not opposed to the humane euthanasia of horses. Second Chance is however concerned that the slaughter of horses for human consumption will result in poor welfare for the horses involved. This is because there is no purpose built abattoir for killing horses for human consumption in Western Australia.

Horses are naturally more flighty than cattle or sheep and abattoir facilities designed for those species are not suitable for horses without compromising their welfare. Unless a race and holding/stunning box is specifically designed for horses, a horse is likely to be able to move excessively which results in ineffective stunning, causing unnecessary pain and suffering during the slaughter process, an unacceptable result.

In addition, personnel at abattoirs are unlikely to be experienced in handling horses. As a minimum, Second Chance would expect anyone involved in handling horses for slaughter to have undergone training in stock handling techniques specified for horses, as is done for other species, in order to minimise stress on the animals and improve safety and welfare.

b. Lack of enforcement of Animal Welfare Legislation
Second Chance is concerned that if a market for horse meat for human consumption is established in Western Australia, the welfare of horses will not be controlled given the current appalling state of animal welfare law enforcement in Western Australia. Such a market could result in horses frequenting saleyards, enduring long distance transportation and the establishment of 'backyard breeders' in an effort to produce large numbers of young horses as cheaply as possible.

The sole animal welfare agency of the State Government, the Animal Welfare Unit of the Department of Local Government and Regional Development, has only 2 inspectors who are responsible for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act 2002 (WA) in all of Western Australia. It is clear that there will be nobody to regulate such an industry and ensure animal welfare standards are complied with.

2. Drug Residues and Food Safety

Horses are not included in the National Livestock Identification System and do not require waybills when sold or moved within Western Australia, unlike other livestock. This means it is impossible to know where horses have come from in the event of a disease outbreak or food safety or residue contamination issue.

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to trace a horse's origin removing incentive for sellers to ensure that horses destined for slaughter are free of chemical residues. Given that the equine industry uses large quantities of drugs, such as phenylbutazone, that have been banned by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority for use in food producing animals, the Government will be placing human health and safety at inexcusable risk. This risk is especially real if the majority of horses destined for slaughter are by-products of the racing industry, an industry which has a high demand for veterinary drugs such as phenylbutazone.

3. International comparison

Second Chance finds the decision of the State Government to legalise horse slaughter for human consumption especially unfathomable given the recent banning of this exact same practice in the United States in 2006.

Link to source