WELLINGTON COUNTY – There are few certainties in life, so the axiom goes, but one thing all horsepeople know for sure is all good things inevitably come to an end.
The death of a beloved horse is a morbid topic, but if you’re involved in a livestock industry, you’re certain to come to terms with deadstock.
The death of a horse can be a lot to handle physically and with a shortage of capacity in the province to handle bodies, horsepeople are having to think about the end long before it arrives.
“The deadstock service disruption stems from multiple factors,” Ontario Equestrian president Danielle Glanc told the Advertiser.
Licensed operators have reduced service areas or elimited services completely in previous years, according to Glanc.
“Horse and livestock owners are left with limited, or worst-case-scenario, no options when looking for deadstock removal or disposal,” Glanc said.
Atwood Resources Inc. is one example.
Last year, owner Tom Smith announced to livestock producers the processor was reducing its service radius for collection, citing the limitations of his facility to process the amount of incoming volume.
The volume growth isn’t necessarily because there are more horses or other animals dying, but because there has been an increase in small slaughterhouses starting up (thanks to government assistance) to expand meat-packing capacity.
Smith is tied to providing services to those slaughterhouses through a 2011 agreement with the province, which ensures more slaughterhouses can be brought on board because Smith will be there to handle the volume, and for Smith the benefit is a consistent flow of business.
According to Smith, Atwood Resources handles 85 per cent of Ontario’s deadstock, processing around 100 cows, and between six and 10 horses per day.
But with a fixed capacity on his current facility and more of a percentage of his business flowing from the increase in slaughterhouses – something has to give.
Smith insists the issue facing horsepeople is not in fact a lack of deadstock collectors, but a lack of processing capacity for the deadstock.
“I will expand the plant, I just can’t do it at this time,” he explained, saying the 2011 agreement has him “handcuffed” until 2023.
“If I would have been able to expand last year, this wouldn’t even be a topic today,” he remarked.
Smith says he’s frustrated by reporters getting the story wrong and believes asking for more collectors waves a false flag.
He worries it will lead to the province issuing more licences for collectors who will still have nowhere to take the deadstock aside from select landfill sites charging upwards of $350 per animal.
Smith reasoned that spreading a relatively stable volume of deadstock across more collectors will result in collection prices being jacked up to make a limited amount of business worthwhile, especially considering the upfront capital investment for a truck and trailer.
And if farmers or horsepeople don’t want to pay exorbitantly high collection prices, he said, it will lead to calls for more collectors – a cycle feeding off itself.
According to Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) media relations strategist Belinda Sutton, since October of 2021, the ministry has issued 16 new licences – spread across eight collectors, four salvaging facilities, three transfer stations and a composting facility – but did not say where those operators are located.
It’s worth noting that a single operation can obtain multiple licences for the various services offered.
The province’s online database of licenced deadstock operators lists 14 operators in western Ontario, and of those, 11 are available to process horses and most are located well beyond the county.
The ministry has made available $1.5 million for cost-sharing through the Canadian Agricultural Partnership to increase operator handling capacity “to address immediate and short-term deadstock capacity needs.”
With a lack of processing capacity or reasonably priced collectors, horsepeople either have to hold onto their deadstock and wait for a collector to become available or find an out-of-area collector.
While a capacity shortfall is facing all livestock sectors, Glanc said horsepeople face some unique challenges.
The majority of horse farms don’t have enough land to facilitate the specific composting and burial conditions required under the Nutrient Management and Food Safety and Quality Acts.
Burial pits must be located in specific areas; maintain prescribed distances from other pits, roadways properties and buildings; there are depth and soil requirements; and there’s a maximum weight for dead animals of 2,500 kilograms per pit – to name some of the regulations.
Although old age can be the catalyst, horses typically die by euthanasia before things get too bad.
Critical injuries and, as was seen through the pandemic, a lack of financial means to properly care for the expensive animals, can also result in a decision to euthanize a horse.
The drug used, sodium pentobarbital, a barbiturate or central nervous system depressant, can also be detected in bodily fluids – potentially causing harm to wildlife if a horse is not properly buried – and has also been detected in compost piles up to a year later.
In addition to those chemical considerations, there are also considerations for water tables and land restrictions.
Heavy equipment is needed to move a carcass and horses can only be buried on the land where they are kept. Given many horsepeople use bordering services, options are limited.
Animals can be disposed of at waste management facilities, if the facility is setup to handle deadstock, but transportation is the challenge.
Incineration is also an option, but there are very specific requirements that apply.
Further complicating an end-of-life scenario is the requirement for deadstock to be disposed of within 48 hours or immediately in the case of putrefaction.
“It is critical that horse and livestock owners have access to the services and resources to address deadstock removal and disposal in a safe, timely and efficient manner,” Glanc said.
Acutely aware of the challenges faced by horsepeople, equine stakeholders and commodity groups have been in discussions with government to find alternative solutions.
In response to questions from the Advertiser, Sutton, the OMAFRA media relations strategist, said that the government had already “developed a regulatory framework to identify on-farm options to assist livestock owners in dealing with deadstock.”
Last year, Ontario Equestrian co-hosted a webinar with the Ontario Harness Horse Association, the Canadian Thoroughbred Horse Society and the province’s agriculture ministry to raise awareness on the issue and dissect current options and legislation.
But the webinar only addressed the short-term, Glanc said.
Now the industry is having to contend with a serious game of catchup to understand what’s going on and what to do about it.
Regardless of the root issue, Glanc said the main takeaway from last year’s equine webinar is that horse owners need to be responsible and plan well ahead of time.
Equine Guelph director Gayle Ecker reinforced the point.
“You need to have that plan in place ahead of time with the funds available,” she said, suggesting owners set aside at least $1,000 to cover expenses such as a vet bill for euthanasia.
Ecker recommends owners work with their vet to come up with a care plan and discuss end-of-life options, especially as senior horses are becoming more common.
Knowledge, veterinary pharmaceuticals, dental care, deworming and nutrition have all improved over the past two decades, leading to longer-living animals.
What used to be considered old, isn’t anymore, Ecker said.
And many people, according to Ecker, are keeping horses beyond their “useful” life because of their relationship with the animals.
To such an extent that Equine Guelph will soon be offering a new online course (thehorseportal.ca) focusing on the senior horse starting this fall.
The course will examine forming a care plan and end-of-life considerations such as deadstock options.
