NEWS & VIEWS Up On The Hill, continued from page 98
partment of Labor. It is expected the USDA would be more attuned to the particular labor needs of farmers. T e program would be attestation-based to
reduce red tape for agricultural employers. T e H-2A uses a certifi cation process that is paper- work and labor intensive. T e bill would give employers the option to
provide either housing or housing vouchers to pay for housing for foreign workers. T e H-2A program requires employers to provide and maintain housing for workers on site. T e bill would require employers to pay the
prevailing wage rate to H-2C workers. T e H-2A program requires employers to pay the adverse eff ect wage rate that is considered ar- tifi cially high. T e bill would require employers to reimburse an H-2C worker for the transportation costs from the worker’s home to the place of em- ployment if the worker completes 50% of the work contract period. A recent court decision directs H-2A employers to reimburse workers for travel the fi rst week of employment. T e H-2C program does not have a “50%”
rule that requires employers to provide employ- ment to any U.S. workers who apply until 50% of the worker’s work contract period is elapsed. T e bill would require that employers guar- antee to use H-2C workers at least half of the workdays during the period of the work con- tract. T e H-2A program requires that employ- ers guarantee three-fourths of the workdays during the period of the work contract. Unlike the H-2A program, the new H-2C
program does not require the qualifying work to be of a temporary or seasonal nature. T is would allow horse farms to use H-2C workers for nonseasonal jobs. T e bill requires H-2C workers to return
home after 10 months of work. T e H-2C pro- gram would have a cap of half a million foreign workers a year. T e H-2A program has no cap.
Congressional Action T e bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary Committee. On September 8, 2011 the House Judiciary Sub- committee on Immigration Policy and En- forcement held a hearing on this bill.
Horse Slaughter Prevention Bill On September 19, 2011, Congressman Dan
Burton (R-IN) introduced the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (H.R.2966). T e bill would prohibit the slaughter of horses for hu- man consumption. A Senate version of this bill S.1176 was introduced in June by Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA). T e House and Sen- ate bills are identical. T is bill would amend the Horse Protection
Act (HPA), which was enacted in 1970 to pro- hibit the showing, transport or sale of horses that have been subjected to any painful process
www.equiery.com | 800-244-9580
to accentuate their gait. T e Animal & Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. De- partment of Agriculture enforces the HPA. T e bill would prohibit the shipping, trans-
porting, or sale of horses for slaughter for human consumption. Such activities would be a viola- tion of the HPA and subject any person who knowingly violates the Act to penalties of up to $3,000 and/or one year in jail for the fi rst off ense and up to $5,000 and/or two years in jail for a second off ense. An off ender may also be subject to civil penalties of $2,000 for each violation. T e bill authorizes $5 million for enforce-
ment. T e bill has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and has 56 cosponsors.
2012 USDA Funding Bill Moves Forward T e Senate Committee on Appropriations
approved its version of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for 2012. T is bill provides funding for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for 2012 fi scal year (October 1, 2011 through Septem- ber 30, 2012) and contains several provisions of interest to the horse industry. T e Senate bill authorized diff erent levels of funding for various USDA programs from the House bill (H.R. 2112), passed on June 1, 2011. T e Senate bill sets overall funding for US-
DA’s Animal and Plant Health Inpsection Ser- vice (APHIS) at $820.1 million. APHIS is the agency responsible for responding to disease outbreaks. T is is approximately $36 million more than the House-approved funding level of $783.4 million. T e Senate bill is $43 million less than
FY2011 levels and $12 million less than the President’s FY2012 budget request. By com- parison, the House bill was $80 million less than FY2011 levels and $49 million below the President’s request for FY2012. However, the Senate bill maintained funding for equine, cervid, and small ruminant health at $22 mil- lion in accordance with the President’s request and the House bill. T e Senate bill funds the Agricultural Research
Service (ARS) at $1.01 billion. ARS is USDA’s chief scientifi c research agency and has played a critical role in mitigating the health and eco- nomic impacts equine infectious diseases, such as Equine Piroplasmosis, have had on the horse industry. T e Senate bill is approximately $100 million more than the House bill authorized. T e Senate bill is $40 million less than
FY2011 levels and the President’s FY2012 budget request; however, the House bill was $146 million less than FY2011 levels and $150 million below the President’s FY2012 request. T e Senate also provided $7 million for the
new animal disease traceability system, which USDA published a proposed rule on in August 2011. You can view the AHC’s information on
the new animal disease traceability program. T e Senate bill approved funding for enforce- ment of the Horse Protection Act at $891,000 which is the same amount as the President’s FY2012 budget request and $400,000 more than the House bill authorized. T e Senate bill also included committee re-
port language expressing concern with the lack of progress on USDA’s 2007 proposed rule changes under the Commercial Transporta- tion of Equines to Slaughter Act. T e Senate Committee directed USDA to fi nalize the rule before October 1, 2011. USDA published the fi nal rule yesterday, September 7, 2011. T is bill must now be approved by the full
Senate, and go through a conference commit- tee with representatives from both the Senate and the House to resolve any diff erences be- tween the two bills.
Slaughter Horse Transport Rules Tightened
T e U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has amended the regulations under the Com- mercial Transport of Equines to Slaughter Act to extend the protections now aff orded to horses that are transported directly to slaughter facilities to include horses bound for slaughter, but fi rst transported to intermediate collection points, such as assembly points, feedlots, or stockyards. T e new rule will go into eff ect on October 7, 2011. In its recently-released report entitled “Horse
Welfare: Action Needed to Address Unintend- ed Consequences from Cessation of Domestic Slaughter,” the Government Accountability Offi ce called on USDA to adopt these pro- posed rules to more broadly defi ne “equines for slaughter” so that Federal oversight is extended to more of the transportation chain for horses going to processing facilities.
Water, Food, Rest In 2001, USDA adopted rules that subjected commercial transporters of slaughter horses to Federal regulation for the fi rst time. T e rules require shippers to certify the fi tness of horses to travel and provide them with water, food, and rest for 6 hours prior to being loaded for transport. Once loaded the horses cannot be shipped for more than 28 hours without being off -loaded for 6 hours and given the chance to rest, eat and drink. During transport, horses must be checked every 6 hours to en- sure that no horse has fallen or is in distress. Shippers must segregate stallions and aggres- sive horses from others, provide enough room for the horses during transport, and use trucks equipped with doors and ramps that allow safe loading and unloading. T e rules prohibited the use of double-deck trailers to transport horses to slaughter after December 7, 2006. In November, 2007, concerned that some
continued on page 104 OCTOBER 2011 | THE EQUIERY | 103
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112