USDA HPA Amendment to ban stacks and chains in the Tennessee Walking Horse

[lindac]

The USDA has opened an open comment period for the public to comment on the proposed amendment to the Horse Protection Act to ban stacks and chains in the Tennessee Walking Horse.

Sound horse people, we need overwhelming support for this amendment to finally rid the TWH of soring that that Horse Protection Act of 1970 has been unable to do.

The stacks and chains are integral to soring and by eliminating these there will very little reason to sore the horses anymore.

I am outraged that it has taken this long to get stacks and chains banned.

PLEASE comment! Please look and see if there is a meeting in your area to attend. There is also going to be a virtual meeting .

Please click the link below and follow the directions to the USDA website to post comments.

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/From-Tawnee---Please-Read-Important.html?soid=1124640806405&aid=SM6yiUADsw0

[Wicky]

Done!

[redalter]

DONE!!

[EcstaticLady]

Done! Thank you for posting the link.

[mylittlemorgan]

Let me just start by saying I abhor soring and do not support stacked pads, weighted shoes, and chains.

However, I have a problem with the proposed change banning pads in general, and for all related breeds (ASB, Morgans, for example). Here’s the proposal: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=APHIS-2011-0009-0001

It is unreasonable to flat out ban pads for all related breeds, as they are stating in the docket (directly copy-pasted below, but please go look for yourselves):

“Amending the regulations to prohibit use of pads, substances, and action devices on horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions,”

What about older horses and post-laminitic horses who carry kids around safely, but need that extra support from a single pad with gel underneath? Or horses who are more comfortable with a shock-absorbing rim pad? Those horses would be SOL.

I applaud and support the fight to end TWH abuse and soring, but banning all pads is ridiculous.

::Edited to add:: I wanted to mention, for anyone reading my post from here forward, that it looks like there is a footnote provision for therapeutic devices. (I don’t want to delete any of the above since I’m still a bit concerned about the “related breeds” section and how it could be interpreted. I should probably add that I am very sensitive to the pad issue as I own a related breed, and my mare is most comfortable, and needs to have, a single pad underneath her shoe.)

In no way do I support soring, stacked pads, chains, and the like, and I agree it is past time for those horses to be protected.

[RubyTuesday]

[QUOTE=mylittlemorgan;8789947]
Let me just start by saying I abhor soring and do not support stacked pads, weighted shoes, and chains.

However, I have a problem with the proposed change banning pads in general, and for all related breeds (ASB, Morgans, for example). Here’s the proposal: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=APHIS-2011-0009-0001

It is unreasonable to flat out ban pads for all related breeds, as they are stating in the docket (directly copy-pasted below, but please go look for yourselves):

“Amending the regulations to prohibit use of pads, substances, and action devices on horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions,”

What about older horses and post-laminitic horses who carry kids around safely, but need that extra support from a single pad with gel underneath? Or horses who are more comfortable with a shock-absorbing rim pad? Those horses would be SOL.

I applaud and support the fight to end TWH abuse and soring, but banning all pads is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

Agree. We don’t need this going in the opposite direction of what is intended.

[DeeDeeDee]

[QUOTE=mylittlemorgan;8789947]
Let me just start by saying I abhor soring and do not support stacked pads, weighted shoes, and chains.

However, I have a problem with the proposed change banning pads in general, and for all related breeds (ASB, Morgans, for example). Here’s the proposal: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=APHIS-2011-0009-0001

It is unreasonable to flat out ban pads for all related breeds, as they are stating in the docket (directly copy-pasted below, but please go look for yourselves):

“Amending the regulations to prohibit use of pads, substances, and action devices on horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions,”

What about older horses and post-laminitic horses who carry kids around safely, but need that extra support from a single pad with gel underneath? Or horses who are more comfortable with a shock-absorbing rim pad? Those horses would be SOL.

I applaud and support the fight to end TWH abuse and soring, but banning all pads is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

I may be confused, but it looks like the proposed amendment refers only to the Horse Protection Act- it is an effort to enforce the HPA. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the HPA applies only to TWHs, racking horses, and similar gaited breeds. So the amendment would only ban pads etc for those particular breeds, as I read it.

[Ladylexie]

I know saddlebred people are saying this applies to all breeds.

[mylittlemorgan]

[QUOTE=DeeDeeDee;8790214]
I may be confused, but it looks like the proposed amendment refers only to the Horse Protection Act- it is an effort to enforce the HPA. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the HPA applies only to TWHs, racking horses, and similar gaited breeds. So the amendment would only ban pads etc for those particular breeds, as I read it.[/QUOTE]

Since it says related breeds, I assume it would apply to Morgans and ASBs. (Some Morgans and ASBs are gaited, and there is Morgan blood in the TWH registry - Allan F-1, the TWH foundation sire, was a Morgan/Hambletonian cross.)

There is also the notation right at the beginning that “the Act is intended to enforce prohibitions against soring in all horse breeds.” While I am completely against soring in any breed, they are including the use of pads in their items that must be banned. That is not ok.

[lindac]

[QUOTE=Ladylexie;8790248]
I know saddlebred people are saying this applies to all breeds.[/QUOTE]

please look at this link.

http://www.horsecouncil.org/press-release/legislation-to-eliminate-soring-introduced-in-the-house/

The American Saddlebred Horse Association supports the PAST ACT. which has tried to remove pads and chains from TWH and other related breeds for the last 3 years.

It clearly states “a Tennessee Walking Horse , a Racing Horse or a Spotted Saddle Horse”.

The Horse Protection Act only applies to those types of horses who have a lateral gait and do not trot.

[Guilherme]

HPA Basics:

The HPA is found in 15 U.S. Code Secs. 1821-1831. Go here to read it https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-44

To what horses does it apply:

Sec. 1822:

The Congress finds and declares that—
(1) the soring of horses is cruel and inhumane;
(2) horses shown or exhibited which are sore, where such soreness improves the performance of such horse, compete unfairly with horses which are not sore;
(3) the movement, showing, exhibition, or sale of sore horses in intrastate commerce adversely affects and burdens interstate and foreign commerce;
(4) all horses which are subject to regulation under this chapter are either in interstate or foreign commerce or substantially affect such commerce; and
(5) regulation under this chapter by the Secretary is appropriate to prevent and eliminate burdens upon commerce and to effectively regulate commerce.

All horses are subject to the Act, but only those horses which are sored to improve performance are regulated. As a practical matter this means Walking, Racking, and Spotted Saddle Horses. If other breeds begin using practices prohibited by the Act they, too, can be regulated.

“Sore” horses are prohibited. What does “sore” mean? It means this:

Sec. 1821

(3) The term “sore” when used to describe a horse means that—
(A) an irritating or blistering agent has been applied, internally or externally, by a person to any limb of a horse,
(B) any burn, cut, or laceration has been inflicted by a person on any limb of a horse,
© any tack, nail, screw, or chemical agent has been injected by a person into or used by a person on any limb of a horse, or
(D) any other substance or device has been used by a person on any limb of a horse or a person has engaged in a practice involving a horse, and, as a result of such application, infliction, injection, use, or practice, such horse suffers, or can reasonably be expected to suffer, physical pain or distress, inflammation, or lameness when walking, trotting, or otherwise moving, except that such term does not include such an application, infliction, injection, use, or practice in connection with the therapeutic treatment of a horse by or under the supervision of a person licensed to practice veterinary medicine in the State in which such treatment was given.

If a pad, chain, or other prohibited device is used to “improve performance” then that triggers the protection of the act to the horse. That includes trotting horses.

The is an entire section of Code of Federal Regulations (44 FR 25179) that create the enforcement mechanism for the HPA.

In short: It applies to all horses that are sored to improve performance, including trotting horses. Since, as a practical matter, soring of a trotter would degrade vice improve performance they are not part of the present regulatory system. If somebody comes up with a way to “sore” a trotter to make it “better” then they will get a visit from APHIS.

G.

[Ladylexie]

[QUOTE=lindac;8790552]
please look at this link.

http://www.horsecouncil.org/press-release/legislation-to-eliminate-soring-introduced-in-the-house/

The American Saddlebred Horse Association supports the PAST ACT. which has tried to remove pads and chains from TWH and other related breeds for the last 3 years.

It clearly states “a Tennessee Walking Horse , a Racing Horse or a Spotted Saddle Horse”.

The Horse Protection Act only applies to those types of horses who have a lateral gait and do not trot.[/QUOTE]

Thanks. I know there are saddlebred people saying the opposite. I will post this link. What about five gaited saddlebreds?

[luvmyhackney]

Here is the link I was given via a Hackney group.
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/07/26/2016-17648/horse-protection-licensing-of-designated-qualified-persons-and-other-amendments#h-17

Saddlebred people I know are worried about being confused with the Racking horses because they rack and have other gaits beside the standard w/t/c:

Read 11.2 (a) & (2) on pg 49131- about devices (a) “prohibited with respect to Tennessee Walking Horse, Racking Horse, or related breed that performs with an accentuated gait that raises concerns about soring at any horse show, horse exhibition, horse sale or horse auction”
and
(1) “any action device as defined in 11.1 is prohibited”
(2) “Any pad, wedge, or hoof band is prohibited”

[roseymare]

I think that it is up for interpretation. The above post sure could be interpreted to include any horse that has knee action.

[Dancer_s_Mom]

Comment is done! Per the footnotes of the rule changes:“This prohibition is not intended to disallow corrective devices…” so regular protective or therapeutic pads would be fine.

[Texarkana]

[QUOTE=mylittlemorgan;8789947]
Let me just start by saying I abhor soring and do not support stacked pads, weighted shoes, and chains.

However, I have a problem with the proposed change banning pads in general, and for all related breeds (ASB, Morgans, for example). Here’s the proposal: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=APHIS-2011-0009-0001

It is unreasonable to flat out ban pads for all related breeds, as they are stating in the docket (directly copy-pasted below, but please go look for yourselves):

“Amending the regulations to prohibit use of pads, substances, and action devices on horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions,”

What about older horses and post-laminitic horses who carry kids around safely, but need that extra support from a single pad with gel underneath? Or horses who are more comfortable with a shock-absorbing rim pad? Those horses would be SOL.

I applaud and support the fight to end TWH abuse and soring, but banning all pads is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

Have you ever seen a TWH shoeing package? There is no doubt what they are referring to is different than a therapeutic pad you would place under a traditional shoe. The “pads” they want to ban are the huge blocks under the hoof, often called stacks.

However, I do agree the wording of the proposed amendment may need to be clarified so that it does not inadvertently ban truly beneficial and therapeutic shoeing practices. This could probably done by adding size/weight limitations to the types of pads banned, as no therapeutic pad comes even close to the size of the TWHs wear.

I can’t seem to find the exact wording of the proposed amendment, just the summaries on the USDA website, so maybe they have already addressed this issue.

[shakeytails]

I will absolutely NOT support a broad prohibition of pads, bands or chains on any breed. Slippery slope and all that. They are not inherently evil. I have and will continue to use them as needed on my perfectly sound horses.

[Texarkana]

[QUOTE=shakeytails;8791551]
I will absolutely NOT support a broad prohibition of pads, bands or chains on any breed. Slippery slope and all that. They are not inherently evil. I have and will continue to use them as needed on my perfectly sound horses.[/QUOTE]

While I agree with the potential for a slippery slope, have you ever been to a Big Lick barn or show?

Everything about that particular facet of the TWH industry in inherently evil.

I think I’m the most open minded and tolerant person in the world. I understand horses need to have jobs. I understand these jobs may require them to be uncomfortable for a short period of time, or do something they may not do when left to their own devices, or even be at an increased risk of accident. But the first time I saw Big Lick horses, I wanted to throw up, go ballistic, and cry all at once.

Something needs to be done to address that part of the industry. They have proven they can not use their own good judgement to police themselves.

[Guilherme]

You, know, folks it really doesn’t matter what some interest group says about a statute. What matters is what the statute says and then what the enforcement agency for that statute does.

The statute makes a clear distinction between the therapeutic pad and other pads. Therapeutic pads are OK. Are pads used by, say, ASBs “therapeutic?” Not being familiar with the mechanics of pad use in trotting horses I’m not sure if they would fall under the statute or not. It’s a fair question, however.

In the TWH show world they were NOT therapeutic even under the most liberal definition possible.

How about chains. The purpose of the chain is to change the horse’s way of going. How does it do that? In the lateral horse it does it by irritating the foot and encouraging a “flinch” to get more front end action. Does it work that way for trotter? Frankly, I don’t know as I’ve never worked with a trotter and chains. If it does then it’s arguably under the strictures of the HPA. That’s arguably bad for the trainers who use and the owners to pay for the use of chains; it’s arguably a Good Thing for the horse who’s feet aren’t getting banged with chain every step.

No soring technique or device is a “training device.” A “training device” is something that is used to get a response and then not used unless and until necessary to either re-establish the response or get a new response. The crop, spur, and bit all fall into this class. The “action device,” whether it technically “sores” the horse or not, is an “anti-training device.” The horse does well and the device continues to activate; the horse does poorly and the device continues to activate. As long as the horse moves the device activates. It’s a “dumb”* device. And even worse, take the device off and the result fades quickly. It trained nothing. It just caused gratuitous pain to gain a cosmetic result. Personally, I consider that outrageous. YMMV.

It’s long past time for this action.

G.

*“Dumb” meaning without brain, judgment, or discretion. It just does what it does until the horse stops moving.

[mylittlemorgan]

Thank you for the above - I missed this yesterday in the docket, and was relieved to find the footnote after I saw your post this morning.