US animal rights groups will have to post a nearly $500,000 bond if they want to continue their court battle against horse slaughter.
Continuing controversy over horse slaughter
A New Mexico judge ordered the Humane Society and other horse protection groups to pay a $500,000 bond to cover losses if they lose a lawsuit they filed against the United States Department of Agriculture for granting permits to plants to resume horse slaughter.
On August 8th, a New Mexico judge ordered the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other horse protection groups to pay the bond to cover economic losses in the event they lose a lawsuit they filed against the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for granting permits to plants to resume horse slaughter.
Bruce Wagman, lawyer for the HSUS, said that his clients were working on gathering funds for the bond, calling it an “onerous amount.”
He said his clients intend to see the lawsuit through, however. “Under prevailing case law, plaintiffs should not be required to pay a bond because there is a recognized exception to the payment of any significant bond where litigation is brought in the public interest, as this case was.”
The case has sparked an emotional debate about how best to deal with the tens of thousands of wild, unwanted and abandoned horses across the country as drought conditions and the lack of feed in many states continue to exacerbate the problem.
The Humane Society of the United States, Front Range Equine Rescue and others won a temporary restraining order last week that blocked Responsible Transportation and Valley Meat Co. in Roswell, N.M., from opening their plants.
The bond covers the companies’ costs and lost profits for the next 30 days should the animal rights groups lose the case. Within that time, another hearing is planned in federal court to determine the fate of the temporary ban.
Attorneys for the animal rights groups argued Thursday that the losses estimated by the companies were highly speculative and the result of creative accounting.
Attorneys for the slaughterhouses disputed those claims.