Propositions question legality of traps, horse meat

Wednesday, October 21, 1998

Propositions question legality of traps, horse meat

ELECTIONS: Voter-signed petitions places issues

of animal rights on ballot

By Emi Kojima

Daily Bruin Senior Staff

Two propositions about animal rights will appear on the ballot
in November, thanks to the initiative of grassroots organizations
in California.

Over 700,000 citizens signed petitions for both measures so that
voters will decide whether Propositions 4 and 6 will become
California law.

Proposition 4 prohibits the use of a "padded steel-jawed leg
hold trap" when catching fur-bearing or non-game mammals for
commercial or recreational use. It also prohibits the use of two
specific poisons.

The trap in question works on a trigger system. The traps grip
an animal’s leg between its padded sides (these are not the kind
with serrated teeth, which are already banned). Animals often
struggle to free themselves from the trap, sometimes even twisting
or biting their legs off.

Six other states have banned these traps, as well as 88
countries.

This proposition would affect about 280 licensed trappers in
California.

Protect Pets and Wildlife is a grassroots coalition made up of
over 100 organizations that support the proposition.

"We are opposed to the cruel and indiscriminate use of the
steel-jawed leg hold traps," said Wayne Pacelle, the senior vice
president for the Humane Society of the United States.

A coalition of 150 organizations has organized to opposed the
amendment, coining itself Californians for People, Pets and
Wildlife.

"Prop. 4 sacrifices endangered species while saving rodents.
That’s unacceptable," said Ray Anderson, a spokesman for the No on
4 campaign.

Pacelle, however, said that the proposition allows for the use
of the traps for damage control activities, for public safety and
for protecting endangered species. What the proposition does not
allow is the use of the trap to capture animals to sell their fur,
he said.

He said the Endangered Species Act, passed by Congress, would
allow the use of the trap because federal law takes precedent over
state law, according to the "supremacy clause" in the
Constitution.

The claim that the act would preempt the proposition is
"absolutely, positively, 100 percent false," according to Bruce
Blodgett, director of national resources at California Farm
Bureau.

He said that whether use of the traps by government agencies is
acceptable would be tied up in the courts, while millions of
dollars would be spent using alternatives to the traps being
banned.

Anderson said that the trap is used in order to catch rodents
and predators – including coyotes and move them into different
areas. Coyotes have threatened populations of endangered species as
well as humans.

Rodents also spread diseases to humans, such as the bubonic
plague.

Pacelle said that the two rodents that the traps threaten are
beavers and muskrats.

About 20 years ago, there was an attempt to pose a ban on the
traps in the California, but the initiative fell short of the
required number of signatures.

"I see no point in the use of steel jawed traps," said Janel
Lalabekyan, a first-year physiological science student.

Richard Kovew disagrees. "For now, the traps are a necessary
evil," said the fourth-year political science student.

Another proposition on the November ballot – Proposition 6 –
would make the sale of horse meat for human consumption illegal

Proposition 6 makes the possession, transfer, or receipt of
horses for slaughter for human consumption a felony.

Although few people eat horse meat in the state, a grassroots
organization called Save the Horses hopes to pass Proposition 6 in
order to prevent the export of horse meat for food.

Horse meat is considered a delicacy in some foreign countries,
including Japan, France and Belgium.

"(Eating horse meat) seems unimportant and trivial unless you’re
a horse. If you’re a horse, it is of great importance," said
Cathleen Doyle, a co-sponsor of the proposition.

"We can afford to give this animal legal protection against
being exported for foreign consumption," she said.

Every year, about 3,000 horses are sent from California to other
states with the intent of being slaughtered for human
consumption.

California has no horse slaughtering facilities.

Ted Brown, the Libertarian candidate for senator, is running the
campaign against Proposition 6, called "Just Say Neigh."

The Libertarian party, the biggest "third party" in the United
States, opposes the measure and generally dislikes government
intervention in the lives of individuals.

"Students should be concerned about personal choice," Brown
said.

"If you’re in the Bruin dining hall and they’re serving horse
meat, you should be able to say Å’oh, this is great’ or
Å’no, I don’t want any.’ The government should not tell you
that it’s illegal," he said.

Human consumption of horse meat is illegal in Illinois and
Texas.

In California, there are currently laws that prevent eating dogs
and cats.

Save the Horses supports the euthanasia of horses; however, the
group disagrees with the way the animals are killed for human
consumption.

It said that horses are killed in cruel and unusual ways when
they are slated as food, because euthanasia ruins the meat of the
animals.

"Horses have served man too well to deserve that at the end of
the day," Doyle said.

Still, Brown maintains that "the government has no business
deciding what people have for dinner."

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]