American Morgan Horse Assoc. opposes Horse Protection Act?

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=microbovine;8843008]
I think there are a lot of fear mongers in regard to this issue. Put the horses first and move on. We all know abuse won’t magically disappear overnight at all horse shows, but, dang it, we should at least make it a lot harder for people to do wicked things for cheap little nylon ribbon! What the heck is so wrong with showing a horse in it’s natural gait? Why in the world would anyone feel the need to defend practices that have led to abuse?

It’s like any sport that needs to adjust how they operate when information about injuries becomes available. Football didn’t stop being played because people got smarter about wearing padding. In this case, the injuries are on a silent victim. All the more reason to proceed with caution. Horses will still be able to perform without pads and chains.[/QUOTE]

Newsflash: Performance is animal abuse per PETA. Breathe deep.

‘practices that have led to abuse…’
‘Bitting can lead to abuse…’, therefore eliminate all bits, rather than the bad bits or people handling bits badly.
‘Use of whips has led to abuse…’, no, people have misused a good tool and been abusive with the tool. Or maybe Dressage people should not be allowed to work horses with whips - in hand or under saddle. Too bad if they object, that would only be because they have much to hide.

Fear monger?

Some see abuse wherever they look if a horse is not running free across open plains.

Stop soring. Call a lame horse lame and disqualify it. Set the owners et al down, fine them, suspend them from showing, revoke their Registry rights or go after the registry if it does not do so after conviction of the owners or trainers.
If judges are putting up sored horses, remove their right to judge.

Measure hoof length: they dropped the ball, here, only saying natural hoof cannot be artificially added to. So one can grow hoof to absurd lengths legally, but put a hoofwrap on or patch a broken out crack and you are DQ.
Eliminate stacks.
Why they haven’t done that in 30+ years, I don’t know. Wait, I do: Enforcement has never been effectively funded.
What happens to a town with no sherriff in the old west?
What happens to an underfunded enforcement effort - see prohibition not working? Outlaw alcohol; that’ll get rid of the drunks!
No, it’ll turn many formerly law abiding citizens into scoff-laws and closet criminals.

Newsflash: USA football is nothing like soccer or rugby, both of which are still minimalist padding.

Everyone has a perspective on the Soring problem.

Telling people to use a smaller mesh net to catch all the dangerous fish that must be out there doesn’t work if you never throw the net in the water in the first place.

First you do something, not talk about it.
Then you do more of that something in a bigger area;
not get deeper into discussion about how to improve on what you aren’t doing in the first place.

I wish they would put the horses first. Knowledge without action is useless.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8843052]

First you do something, not talk about it.
Then you do more of that something in a bigger area;
not get deeper into discussion about how to improve on what you aren’t doing in the first place.

I wish they would put the horses first. Knowledge without action is useless.[/QUOTE]

Those who can, do. Those who cannot, or will not…they post more.

You obviously care about this issue. So, do something about it. I have come to a place in my life where I have drawn the line. I have been extremely public about my opinions on feet and tails. It was about damn time.

The UPHA- representing the trainers of the trotting breeds who would be affected by the law are claiming, variously, that the horses NEED pads, because of the amount of concussion that they incur in their work. They do not really discuss the need for bands. I mean, that one is tough to explain, unless you admit to MULTIPLE pads. Sometimes, these pads even conceal things. But, we won’t go there. The trainers are serene in their belief that NOT discussing what they are really doing will allow for their claims to have greater gravitas. You shouldn’t pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.

Recently, they have claimed that their show horses incur greater concussion than jumpers and dressage horses. Are you freaking kidding me? The show horses work, what, maybe a big 20 minutes a day, and no more than that in the ring at any show. On carefully managed footing. It simply is amazing to me that anyone could make such a claim. Except that- well- they don’t get it. And, they don’t want to. They’ve been drinking the koolaid that the industry has been brewing for so long, that maybe, just maybe, they believe it. At least I’d like to think so. Because then I do not have to simply believe that they do nt give a red hot damn about the horses.

The Vets and Blacksmiths who work in this industry? I am disgusted with them, but I get it. I mean, you’ve been lying to these people for so long, how the hell are you going to come out now, and tell them what they’ve been doing to their horses- most, not all of them- is heinous? And especially when it makes you a grand living?

The ASHA was warned about this some time ago. But, they chose to watch the Big Lick people go under the bus, and keep driving. Well, guess what? It didn’t go away. And even if the bus misses you this time…it will be back.

[D_BaldStockings]

First off, TWH that are sored are not my monkeys, not my circus.

I believe enough has been done regulation side of things.

I am neither qualified nor do I choose to take the time to volunteer to assist at policing shows, venues, auctions on the East, South and Midwest half a continent away: cost prohibitive to say the least. And I’m not as spry nor do I have the endurance I once did.

Go ahead and say I do nothing. I believe you are right.

Sadly, the HPA also did little to nothing for 30 years when mandated to do something.

If lawmakers micro-regulated EVERYTHING with regard to horses, the criminal element would still act as criminals. There is no limit to human creativity.

I don’t like seeing bullying of people who aren’t doing wrong.

This is only a discussion forum. I discuss.

If I truly wanted to change things politically, I would act as a politician: arm-twisting, bribing, publicly mudslinging or hero-worshiping through social media and fundraising for all my agendas to get the upper hand.

I don’t want to control others. I respect their individual preferences so long as they are humane or ecologically sound long term.

If they are criminals, stop them. That should be my tax money working.
I’m no vigilante.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844194]

I don’t like seeing bullying of people who aren’t doing wrong. [/QUOTE]

And my issue is that I think that what is being done to other breeds falls under the auspices of the USDA HPA, and is wrong. And it needs to stop.

[Guilherme]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844194]
First off, TWH that are sored are not my monkeys, not my circus.

Fair enough.

I believe enough has been done regulation side of things.

I could ask why, in light of the above, are you continuing the discussion. But I won’t.

There are multiple reasons why we are where we are. The Regulations of the past were highly influenced by the Sore Lick crowd as they had heavy weight political influence on their side. No so much anymore.

I am neither qualified nor do I choose to take the time to volunteer to assist at policing shows, venues, auctions on the East, South and Midwest half a continent away: cost prohibitive to say the least. And I’m not as spry nor do I have the endurance I once did.

Go ahead and say I do nothing. I believe you are right.

Fair enough.

Sadly, the HPA also did little to nothing for 30 years when mandated to do something.

If lawmakers micro-regulated EVERYTHING with regard to horses, the criminal element would still act as criminals. There is no limit to human creativity.

If this is your argument against Regulation then there should never be Regulation of anything, ever. That would make you a Libertarian of some type. That’s perfectly OK, but also perfectly Utopian.

I don’t like seeing bullying of people who aren’t doing wrong.

Neither do I. The Regulations propose don’t do this.

This is only a discussion forum. I discuss.

If I truly wanted to change things politically, I would act as a politician: arm-twisting, bribing, publicly mudslinging or hero-worshiping through social media and fundraising for all my agendas to get the upper hand.

I don’t want to control others. I respect their individual preferences so long as they are humane or ecologically sound long term.

If they are criminals, stop them. That should be my tax money working.
I’m no vigilante.[/QUOTE]

Neither am I. Nor am I a Libertarian or a Utopian.

G.

[D_BaldStockings]

Sadly, the HPA also did little to nothing for 30 years when mandated to do something.

If lawmakers micro-regulated EVERYTHING with regard to horses, the criminal element would still act as criminals. There is no limit to human creativity.

[QUOTE=Guilherme;8844360]
If this is your argument against Regulation then there should never be Regulation of anything, ever. That would make you a Libertarian of some type. That’s perfectly OK, but also perfectly Utopian.

…
Neither am I. Nor am I a Libertarian or a Utopian.

G.[/QUOTE]

So you want micro-regulation? While continuing with intermittent enforcement at best?

I am not affiliated with any party or dogma - feel free to put me in any pigeonhole/box you are comfortable with, we all need to feel in control - but I won’t be there.

I am too cynical for Utopian, hence the ‘likely continuing failure of enforcement’ comments.

I do not promote dismantling existing laws and regulations, and I am also aware of the dysfunctionalism of laissez-faire Capitalism; so I suppose that leaves out Libertarian as well.

Afraid your if-then argument based on hyperbole, is fatally flawed.

**

What if any plans to enforce AKA supply funding for enforcement are in the works?

What sanctions can be taken against the Performance Show Horse committee arm of the TWHBEA to successfully redirect them away from stacks and soring?
Surely promoting shows and developing rules being under their jurisdiction would imply responsibility for erosion and flaunting of those rules “To assist in the preservation and development of traditional horse shows in which the quality of gait is rewarded …”

If thine arm offend thee, cut it off?
In separating the soring cancer from a delightful breed of horse, just wondering why no one has gone up the chain of command to the Generals for a coup, so to speak?

Thanks,

[Guilherme]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844535]
Sadly, the HPA also did little to nothing for 30 years when mandated to do something.

If lawmakers micro-regulated EVERYTHING with regard to horses, the criminal element would still act as criminals. There is no limit to human creativity.

It is false to say that there has been no progress in 30 years. First because the HPA was first passed in 1970 making in 46 years old. Second because it has been amended twice, IIRC, and the things you saw in the LIFE Magazine expose’ of 1968 (including blood streaming from the horses’ feet) is gone. You keep using the term “micro-regulating.” And you complain that the language of the Regulations is too vague. I’m wondering how you define a “vague, micro-regulation.” Human criminal ingenuity is impressive. That’s why the new Regulations are required.

So you want micro-regulation? While continuing with intermittent enforcement at best?

I am not affiliated with any party or dogma - feel free to put me in any pigeonhole/box you are comfortable with, we all need to feel in control - but I won’t be there.

I am too cynical for Utopian, hence the ‘likely continuing failure of enforcement’ comments.

I do not promote dismantling existing laws and regulations, and I am also aware of the dysfunctionalism of laissez-faire Capitalism; so I suppose that leaves out Libertarian as well.

Afraid your if-then argument based on hyperbole, is fatally flawed.

**

What if any plans to enforce AKA supply funding for enforcement are in the works?

What sanctions can be taken against the Performance Show Horse committee arm of the TWHBEA to successfully redirect them away from stacks and soring?
Surely promoting shows and developing rules being under their jurisdiction would imply responsibility for erosion and flaunting of those rules “To assist in the preservation and development of traditional horse shows in which the quality of gait is rewarded …”

None. Walkers and Rackers were run out of the USEF decades ago. They run their own show promotion/regulatory arm. Used to be called the National Horse Show Commission. That’s defunct; I don’t know what it is now.

If thine arm offend thee, cut it off?
In separating the soring cancer from a delightful breed of horse, just wondering why no one has gone up the chain of command to the Generals for a coup, so to speak?

Been there; done that; got smacked down big time. I organized a meeting wherein we proposed to have sound horse Walker owners identify and vote for Directors that would challenge the status quo. This was in Houston in the early '90s. The net result was a bylaw change in the TWHBEA that strengthened the representation of the “core” areas of the breed and functionally disenfranchised the peripheral areas were reformers were located. The TWHBEA is a private corporation and can run their business pretty much any way they want to. It ended any real effort in in-breed reform. Even now, with the TWBHEA looking at bankruptcy as a real possibility there is no reform in sight.

Thanks,[/QUOTE]

The fear that USDA/APHIS is suddenly going to start showing up at 4H shows around the country looking for HPA violations under the aegis of the proposed regulations is sheer fantasy. They don’t have the funds and never will. And even if they did as long as the rules are being followed there would be no harm if there were no foul. If there were fouls then consequences would follow, as they should.

This is nominal “regulation,” not any sort of conspiratorial “micro-regulation.”

G.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Guilherme;8844601]
The fear that USDA/APHIS is suddenly going to start showing up at 4H shows around the country looking for HPA violations under the aegis of the proposed regulations is sheer fantasy. They don’t have the funds and never will. And even if they did as long as the rules are being followed there would be no harm if there were no foul. If there were fouls then consequences would follow, as they should.

This is nominal “regulation,” not any sort of conspiratorial “micro-regulation.”

G.[/QUOTE]

No one knows if that is so or not.
If all it takes is a bit of tweaking in the wording, why not do that, be proactive, just in case?

Abuse needs to be stopped, but be sure to do that without letting animal rights extremists get a foot in the door to then abuse the rights of animal owners that are not abusing their animals, by giving animal rights extremists ways to harass everyone, following their extreme agendas that any use is abuse.

Why not help with comments to draft more specific regulations that will insure only abuse, not standard use, is targeted?

[D_BaldStockings]

Bluey,
G believes that any use of any attachment to a horse’s extremity for any non-therapeutic function - that is, to alter, change or accentuate gait - is inherently evil and thus so are any who use them.

Please note that the actual comment from the AVMA and writers of the amendments to the HPA is that the attachments used alone do not sore, but if used with lubricants/liquids could sore. And that is the only reason to exclude them - not that they are inherently bad.
So they are out completely.

Currently horses at USEF shows are allowed to warm up with boots, bandages or whatever on their legs as trainers and owners see fit. USEF has rules regarding lame horses being eliminated.
While the HPA may not choose to have inspectors at USEF shows currently, this would create a Federal law, which of course overrides any local, or USEF rules.

The only vagueness in the rule is ‘related breeds’. Since most horses outside of Icelandics are co-related in many ways, how can this be considered limiting in any way? It isn’t.

The language should be about related treatment / presentation = soring or potential soring. Has nothing to do with breed so the language is misleading.

[D_BaldStockings]

G,
One wonders if a GoFundMe campaign or similar could buy that near bankrupt corporation and it’s main asset: the Registry, to put it under new management.

Happens in the corporate world.

Without support from the Association, Shows would have to change the judges to those in line with no sore standards. And wins drive trainers to change to please their clients like nothing else.
This would put pressure on the racking/other shows to clean up their acts as well when the attention shifts to them as outcast culprits.

Utopian I suppose.

I don’t feel it is conspiratorial, but it is micro-managing:
“Because you could stab me with a sharpened pencil, we will support using chalk writing implements only. -Might take a bit longer to write the novel, but it’s for everyone’s good.”

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=Guilherme;8844601]
The fear that USDA/APHIS is suddenly going to start showing up at 4H shows around the country looking for HPA violations under the aegis of the proposed regulations is sheer fantasy. They don’t have the funds and never will. …

G.[/QUOTE]

That is one of the saddest statements regarding a rule that I have seen.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844685]
G believes that any use of any attachment to a horse’s extremity for any non-therapeutic function - that is, to alter, change or accentuate gait - is inherently evil and thus so are any who use them.[/QUOTE]

He isn’t alone. I daresay that any owners of horses outside of those controlled by trainers within the UPHA would feel exactly the same.

I do not think that the trainers are “inherently evil”. I just believe that they are part of a system whose time has passed, and they need to wake up.

The “good ones” need to go light, once again.

[jdobbs64]

If we have to nail on talent it’s not talent.

The reason they aren’t planning on just inspecting TWHs is so that they can also inspect the newly branded Western Missouri Non Trotting Horse or maybe the Alabama Smooth Moving Horse…they cannot limit themselves to TWH by name; they know better.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=jdobbs64;8845036]
If we have to nail on talent it’s not talent. [/QUOTE]

I wish every single UPHA trainer would read and understand that statement. Thank you.

[pattnic]

[QUOTE=jdobbs64;8845036]
If we have to nail on talent it’s not talent.[/QUOTE]

I’m totally changing my signature line to this. And probably posting it on Facebook, as well. (With your permission, of course).

[Guilherme]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844685]
Bluey,
G believes that any use of any attachment to a horse’s extremity for any non-therapeutic function - that is, to alter, change or accentuate gait - is inherently evil and thus so are any who use them.

Half truth, here. The part about the devices is correct. The part about the user of devices is not. Some are users out of ignorance (the “daddydiditthataway” reasoning one often sees). Some out of tradition. But most just don’t care if it injures or not. And that’s one of the saddest statements, ever.

Please note that the actual comment from the AVMA and writers of the amendments to the HPA is that the attachments used alone do not sore, but if used with lubricants/liquids could sore. And that is the only reason to exclude them - not that they are inherently bad.
So they are out completely.

And rightly so.

Currently horses at USEF shows are allowed to warm up with boots, bandages or whatever on their legs as trainers and owners see fit. USEF has rules regarding lame horses being eliminated.
While the HPA may not choose to have inspectors at USEF shows currently, this would create a Federal law, which of course overrides any local, or USEF rules.

Correct.

The only vagueness in the rule is ‘related breeds’. Since most horses outside of Icelandics are co-related in many ways, how can this be considered limiting in any way? It isn’t.

It’s a relation by type and use, not blood.

The language should be about related treatment / presentation = soring or potential soring. Has nothing to do with breed so the language is misleading.[/QUOTE]

Breed can be based on blood, type, or usage. Or even color or shape of ears. So the language must be broad or, as you have pointed out on multiple occasions, the miscreants will simply create “work arounds.”

G.

[Guilherme]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;8844715]
That is one of the saddest statements regarding a rule that I have seen.[/QUOTE]

It’s also one of the truest. Even Federal law enforcement does not have unlimited funds. It’s a reality of law enforcement at every level. They just don’t like to admit it.

G.

[jdobbs64]

[QUOTE=pattnic;8845667]
I’m totally changing my signature line to this. And probably posting it on Facebook, as well. (With your permission, of course).[/QUOTE]

Sure, it’s not original but I encourage you to share

[luvmyhackney]

So what’s your thoughts on this announcement…
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/news/!ut/p/z1/jZDBCoJAEIafxqszWol1W8NKERXStL2ExrYK6opavn5CJ8PMuc3wffMzAxRioFXyynnS5aJKiqG_Uu3meOu9YpzROR58E0no2YblooruBqIx4F1OGhIzCANXVwxrqwJd4uOPIrjMnwHo_PoI6HyE9g1MnPgvxAbKC5F-_kmqdKVzoA17sIY18rMZxlnX1e1OQgn7vpe5ELxg8l2UEk4pmWg7iMck1GUYxpj7ZaS3b5HJjII!/?1dmy&urile=wcm%3Apath%3A%2Faphis_content_library%2Fsa_newsroom%2Fsa_stakeholder_announcements%2Fsa_by_date%2Fstakeholder-announcements-2016%2Fsa-09%2Fhorse-protection-comments

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=luvmyhackney;8849399]
So what’s your thoughts on this announcement…
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/news/!ut/p/z1/jZDBCoJAEIafxqszWol1W8NKERXStL2ExrYK6opavn5CJ8PMuc3wffMzAxRioFXyynnS5aJKiqG_Uu3meOu9YpzROR58E0no2YblooruBqIx4F1OGhIzCANXVwxrqwJd4uOPIrjMnwHo_PoI6HyE9g1MnPgvxAbKC5F-_kmqdKVzoA17sIY18rMZxlnX1e1OQgn7vpe5ELxg8l2UEk4pmWg7iMck1GUYxpj7ZaS3b5HJjII!/?1dmy&urile=wcm%3Apath%3A%2Faphis_content_library%2Fsa_newsroom%2Fsa_stakeholder_announcements%2Fsa_by_date%2Fstakeholder-announcements-2016%2Fsa-09%2Fhorse-protection-comments[/QUOTE]

My take? Those who would be affected, but are trying desperately not to be are hoping to get their $hit together, and come at this with some legal firepower. They need time to do that.

There was a petition put out by the ASPCA looking for support of the law- as written. They were looking for 30K signatures, and last I saw, they had over 36K. As an example, there aren’t even 6K members of the ASHA, I don’t think, although I could be incorrect.

I haven’t commented yet, but I plan on it.