U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

87–602 2015

H.R. 1518, A BILL TO AMEND THE HORSE 

PROTECTION ACT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING, 

AND TRADE 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOVEMBER 13, 2013 

Serial No. 113–91 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

Chairman 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Chairman Emeritus 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

Vice Chairman 

PHIL GINGREY, Georgia 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

MIKE POMPEO, Kansas 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Missouri 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

RENEE L. ELLMERS, North Carolina 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

Ranking Member 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

Chairman Emeritus 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky 

(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING, AND TRADE

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

Chairman 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

Vice Chairman 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVE B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

MIKE POMPEO, Kansas 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Missouri 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

FRED UPTON, Michigan, ex officio 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

Ranking Member 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, ex officio 

(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Lee Terry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 2 

Hon. Janice D. Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Illinois, opening statement .............................................................................. 3 

Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee, opening statement ............................................................................ 3 

Hon. Ed Whitfield, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth 

of Kentucky, opening statement ......................................................................... 4 

Hon. Henry A. Waxman, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

California, prepared statement ........................................................................... 97 

WITNESSES

Julius Johnson, Commissioner, Tennessee Department of Agriculture .............. 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7 

Marty Irby, International Director and Former President, Tennessee Walking 

Horse Breeders and Exhibitors Association ....................................................... 10 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

W. Ron DeHaven, DVM, MBA, Executive Vice President and CEO, American 

Veterinary Medical Association, and Former Administrator, USDA Animal 

and Plant Health Inspection Service .................................................................. 19 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

John Bennett, DVM, Equine Services LLC, on behalf of Performance Show 

Horses Association ............................................................................................... 37 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39 

Donna Benefield, Vice President, International Walking Horse Association ..... 51 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 54 

Teresa Bippen, President, Friends of Sound Horses ............................................ 60 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62 

James J. Hickey, Jr., President, American Horse Council ................................... 65 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 67 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Statements from The Cavalry Group, submitted by Mr. Long *

Whitfield docs ........................................................................................................... 98 

Blackburn docs ......................................................................................................... 129 

1 The information has been retained in committee files and is also available 

at http://docs.house.gov/meetings/if/if17/20131113/101469/hhrg-113- 

if17-20131113-sd004.pdf 

(1) 

H.R. 1518. A BILL TO AMEND THE HORSE 

PROTECTION ACT 

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2013 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING, AND

TRADE, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:08 a.m., in room 

2322 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lee Terry (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Terry, Lance, Blackburn, Guthrie, 

Kinzinger, Bilirakis, Johnson, Schakowsky, Yarmuth, Matheson, 

Barrow, and Whitfield. 

Staff present: Charlotte Baker, Press Secretary; Kirby Howard, 

Legislative Clerk; Nick Magallanes, Policy Coordinator, Commerce, 

Manufacturing, and Trade; Brian McCullough, Senior Professional 

Staff Member, Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade; Gib Mullan, 

Chief Counsel, Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade; Heidi Stirrup, Health Policy Coordinator; and Shannon Weinberg Taylor, 

Counsel, Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade. 

Mr. TERRY. I think we have all of our technical difficulties fixed 

as well, so Ms. Schakowsky, are we ready? 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I am ready. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LEE TERRY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA 

Mr. TERRY. All right. First of all, I just want to thank all of our 

witnesses for being here today on Mr. Whitfield’s bill. 

So welcome to today’s hearing of the CMT Subcommittee, and I 

am pleased to welcome our witnesses and my good friend, Mr. 

Whitfield, the chairman of Energy and Power Subcommittee, and 

sponsor of this legislation that we are going to discuss today. 

Throughout my life, I have admired horses. I remember fondly 

riding horses at my grandpa’s place in Colorado. I also put myself 

through 2 years of college and law school working at Ak-Sar-Ben 

Racetrack and have quite an affinity for the Thoroughbreds. 

Now, Congressman Whitfield’s legislation, the Prevent All Soring 

Tactics Act, amends various parts of the Horse Protection Act of 

1970 and 1976. H.R. 1518 bans the use of all action devices, 

weighted shoes, pads, hoof bands and other devices which alter the 

horse’s gait. This legislation would also change the current self-governing framework, where Horse Industry Organizations train and 

appoint inspectors for shows and exhibitions with some oversight 

2 

by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, an agency of 

the Department of Agriculture. Now, H.R. 1518 would direct the 

Secretary of Agriculture to promote new regulations under which 

USDA would take over the licensing, training, assigning and overseeing of these inspectors. 

I look forward today to an exchange of ideas reflecting multiple 

viewpoints on this legislation. No law is ever perfect, and often, 

Congress needs to act in order to modernize, clarify or reduce burdens. I have no doubt that there are issues within the HPA that 

need to be addressed. However, I believe that when Congress is 

considering legislation that adds new layers of regulation to an industry, we must be precise and careful. This means narrowly tailoring this legislation to fit the specific problem that needs to be 

addressed. 

I want to thank everyone again for being here and traveling. I 

know several of you have come a long ways. We have a government 

official from Tennessee, Commissioner Julius Johnson, Tennessee’s 

Commissioner of Agriculture, here, and pursuant to our traditional 

protocols, government officials get to testify first, and what we will 

do is, we will go from your right, my left, down the panel and we 

will discuss those rules when we get there. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Terry follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LEE TERRY

Welcome to today’s hearing of the CMT subcommittee. I am pleased to welcome 

our witnesses and to welcome my good friend, Congressman Whitfield, the Chairman of the Energy and Power Subcommittee and sponsor of the legislation that is 

the subject of today’s legislative hearing. 

I have admired horses for much of my adult life, beginning in college and law 

school when I worked part-time at the local racetrack in Omaha. The idea of these 

animals being abused and mistreated, whether on the rack track or in the show 

ring, bothers me a great deal. 

Congressman Whitfield’s legislation, the Prevent All Soring Tactics Act, amends 

various parts of the Horse Protection Act of 1970 and 1976. H.R. 1518 bans the use 

of all ‘‘action devices,’’ weighted shoes, pads, hoof bands and other devices which 

alter the horse’s gait. This legislation would also change the current self-governing 

framework, where Horse Industry Organizations train and appoint inspectors for 

shows and exhibitions with some oversight by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), an agency of the Department of Agriculture. H.R. 1518 would 

direct the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate new regulations under which 

USDA would take over the licensing, training, assigning and overseeing of these inspectors. 

I look forward today to an exchange of ideas reflecting multiple viewpoints on this 

legislation. No law is ever perfect, and often, Congress needs to act in order to modernize, clarify or reduce burdens. I have no doubt that there are issues within the 

HPA that need to be addressed. However, I believe that when Congress is considering legislation that adds new layers of regulation to an industry, we must be precise. This means narrowly tailoring this legislation to fit the specific problem that 

needs to be addressed. 

Thank you again, and welcome, to our witnesses for traveling here today. I would 

especially like to welcome an elected official from Tennessee, Commissioner Julius 

Johnson, Tennessee’s Commissioner of Agriculture. 

Mr. TERRY. Since the vice chairman isn’t here, does anyone other 

than Ed and Marsha want 2 minutes? Seeing none, I yield back my 

time and now yield your 5 minutes to our ranking member, Jan 

Schakowsky. 

3 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this hearing, and I want to welcome all the witnesses for considering of H.R. 1518 sponsored by my good friend, Ed Whitfield, 

the PAST Act, Prevent All Soring Tactics. I am a previous horse 

owner. In addition to learning how to ride and jump a little— 

wasn’t very good at it; my horse was better at it than I was—I 

learned how to keep him healthy and sound. 

We are dealing today with Tennessee Walking Horses, who have 

been known historically for their distinctive gait but evidence continues to emerge that too often these wonderful horses are trained 

through inhumane and really tortuous treatment, especially for 

high-stakes competitions. We are going to see a video, a very disturbing video, after I finish. It is short, 2 minutes and some 50 seconds. But what we will see are tactics that absolutely need to be 

stopped. The Horse Protection Act in 1970 was designed to eradicate the practice of soring. You will see this, the soring of the feet 

of the horses. Unfortunately, the Horse Protection Act enforcement 

is lax and the industry’s self-policing has been largely ineffective 

in eliminating the practice. And so this legislation makes sense. In 

fact, as of today, it is cosponsored by 223 Members, well over a majority in the House of Representatives. We need to make sure that 

we really are protecting horses. That is what the PAST bill does, 

and I hope this video will make it very clear. This is ABC 

Nightline, a very short clip of it, if you could play that, please, as 

part of my testimony? 

[Video shown.] 

And I yield back. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. At this time I will yield2 1⁄2 minutes to 

the gentlelady from Tennessee. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to welcome Commissioner Johnson and appreciate him being here. 

I think that we all agree that the soring of horses in any form 

is objectionable on every level, and for good reason. Soring is illegal, and you are going to hear from Commissioner Johnson. The 

State of Tennessee has zero tolerance for those who knowingly 

commit violations and have worked diligently with industry leaders 

to curb the practices. In fact, according to the most recent data 

from USDA, the compliance rate for shows this year has been over 

96 percent with less than 4 percent of the nearly 10,000 inspections 

resulted in some sort of sore violation. Accordingly, the USDA, this 

is their compliance rate. For the Horse Industry Organization-affiliated Tennessee Walking Horses shows it was 98 1⁄2 percent over 

the period 2009 to 2012. 

So why is additional legislation necessary for an industry that is 

over 98 percent compliant? Now, let us compare this to the Thoroughbred racing industry, which is in our neighboring State of 

Kentucky in which one report found that 3,000 horses died between 

4 

2009 and 2011. During the same period, one horse participating in 

a Tennessee Walking Horse show event died. Based on conversations I have had with breeders in Tennessee, enacting the bill before us would potentially eliminate an entire division of horse breed 

and result in the loss of thousands of jobs in Tennessee, Kentucky, 

Missouri, Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Mississippi. 

They are all connected with the industry. The economic impact of 

the Walking Horse industry in Tennessee is $1.5 billion. The Celebration Show in Shelbyville, Tennessee, brings in over $40 million 

to that community. This legislation imposes excessive regulatory 

burdens on the Walking Horse industry and could potentially eliminate the entire industry and thus the entire breed. 

With that, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. 

Whitfield. 

Mr. TERRY. The gentleman is recognized for 2 1⁄2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ED WHITFIELD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, I thank the gentlelady very much for yielding, and I appreciate Chairman Terry and Ms. Schakowsky having 

this hearing today. 

As has been said, the Horse Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1970 to stop the practice of soring. The only breeds being 

sored today are the Tennessee Walking Horses, the Spotted Saddle 

and Racking. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Inspector General report issued a few years ago has concluded that the current 

program for inspecting for soring is not adequate to ensure that 

these animals are not being abused. The DQPs being hired by the 

HIOs have a clear conflict of interest and do not properly enforce 

the Horse Protection Act. 

Many in the horse show industry do not regard the abuse of 

horses as a problem, and when USDA inspectors conduct their few 

inspections, they are subjected to intimidation and harassment and 

must routinely bring law enforcement for protection. USDA has 

recommended that the DQP program be abolished and independent, accredited veterinarians perform inspections at sanctioned 

shows. 

H.R. 1518 adopts that recommendation and makes it more difficult to sore and use devices to alter the horse’s natural gait. This 

bill has widespread support including 4 horse organizations including the American Horse Council. It has all 50 State veterinary 

medical associations, the American Association of Equine Practitioners, and 223 Members of Congress are cosponsors. 

We are going to hear testimony today about the show entity in 

the Shelbyville, Tennessee, area being 98.5 percent compliant. We 

are also going to hear other witnesses disagree with that, and we 

are going to tell you why they disagree with it. 

I feel bad that we would not have this problem today in the industry except for a few areas around Shelbyville, Tennessee, a few 

areas in Missouri, and yes, a few areas in Kentucky, and that is 

why later on we are going to find out why the inspector organizations in Tennessee and in Missouri and in Kentucky have been notified by the Department of Agriculture that they are going to be 

5 

decertified. They are not there yet, but I look forward to the hearing and the information that we will learn from it. Thank you. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Mr. Whitfield, and now it is time for the 

show, which is hearing from our witnesses on H.R. 1518, and I am 

going to introduce the witnesses now, and then when I am finished 

with that, we will start with Mr. Johnson. Each of you will have 

5 minutes. There is a little—well, I see one in front of Ms. 

Benefield and one behind us. Green means you are good to go. 

When it starts to get yellow, or when it is yellow, that means start 

wrapping it up, and red, I am going to probably interject and have 

you wrap up at that point. 

So we have a really fantastic panel with us today. We have the 

Hon. Julius Johnson, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department 

of Agriculture, then Marty Irby, International Director and former 

President, Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders and Exhibitors Association. We have Mr. Ron DeHaven, DVM, Executive Vice President and CEO of American Veterinary Medical Association, former 

Administrator, USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 

Thank you for being here. Mr. John Bennett, DVM, Equine Services, LLC, on behalf of the Performance Show Horse Association; 

Donna Benefield, International Walking Horse Association, then 

Teresa Bippen, President, Friends of Sound Horses, and last to testify, James Hickey, Jr., President, American Horse Council. 

So at this time I want to recognize the Hon. Julius Johnson for 

your 5 minutes. 

STATEMENTS OF HON. JULIUS JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER, 

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; MARTY IRBY, 

INTERNATIONAL DIRECTOR AND FORMER PRESIDENT, TENNESSEE WALKING HORSE BREEDERS AND EXHIBITORS ASSOCIATION; W. RON DEHAVEN, DVM, MBA, EXECUTIVE VICE 

PRESIDENT AND CEO, AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, AND FORMER ADMINISTRATOR, USDA ANIMAL 

AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE; JOHN BENNETT, 

DVM, EQUINE SERVICES LLC, ON BEHALF OF PERFORMANCE SHOW HORSES ASSOCIATION; DONNA BENEFIELD, 

VICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL WALKING HORSE ASSOCIATION; TERESA BIPPEN, PRESIDENT, FRIENDS OF SOUND 

HORSES; AND JAMES J. HICKEY, JR., PRESIDENT, AMERICAN 

HORSE COUNCIL 

STATEMENT OF JULIUS JOHNSON 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Chairman Terry, Ranking Member 

Schakowsky and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate this 

opportunity. I am going to stick to my statement and be very brief 

at the same time. 

As Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Agriculture, I 

appreciate you allowing me to provide testimony on the importance 

of the equine industry and especially the Tennessee Walking Horse 

industry to our State. The equine industry is an important part of 

Tennessee’s economy and its heritage. We are ranked among the 

top six States in the Nation in number of equine, according to the 

latest census of agriculture. Our Market Development Division 

within the Department helps to support this growing industry 

6 

through promotion of Tennessee trails, shows and events and 

through the involvement with numerous breed associations. Tennessee is home to several national breed associations in addition to 

the Tennessee Walking Horse. 

Some facts about Tennessee’s equine industry are a 2010 survey 

indicated 170,000 head but a more comprehensive survey in 2004 

indicated 240,000 head in Tennessee. We believe the numbers have 

not declined but rather the variation is more due to the tactics of 

which the survey was taken. There are 41,000 Tennessee farms 

with horses, 41,000. There are 3.2 million acres, 30 percent of Tennessee’s farmland, designated to equine uses. So you can see this 

industry as a whole is very important to our State agricultural industry. 

The total economic impact from the equine industry in Tennessee 

is $1.4 billion. The total value added impact of equine in Tennessee 

is $746 million. The indirect business tax revenue received by state 

and local government is $61.2 million, and the total estimated economic impact from the horse shows and events is $45 million. The 

importance of the industry to the many local and rural community 

charities, which they organize these activities, and other organizations is tremendously significant. It is going to be a major hit to 

rural Tennessee. 

The industry creates 20,309 jobs throughout our State, and again 

especially in rural Tennessee, which is so hard pressed to attract 

any jobs, and it is more meaningful there than any other place, and 

we simply will be devastated with the loss of this kind of jobs. 

The Tennessee Department of Agriculture and I personally find 

the soring of horses in any shape, form or fashion objectionable on 

every level. There should be no tolerance for animal cruelty. Walking horse industry leaders have made what we believe are monumental strides at eliminating this practice from the industry, and 

we believe they are committed to a policy of zero tolerance for individuals who commit violations. We understand the motives of some 

to further tighten the regulation of the industry in order to protect 

the horse. However, we caution against overreaction by some who 

seek to eliminate horse shows at the expense of rural communities 

across the State and horse owners, the vast majority of whom are 

caring and responsible in the management of their animals. 

Rural Tennessee would suffer the greatest as a result of this type 

of legislation. We urge this committee and Congress to find the 

right balance that protects the horse as well as ensures the viability of the walking horse industry should you find it necessary to 

pass any legislation at all. 

The Tennessee Walking Horse is a wonderful, dynamic breed 

that has been the enjoyment of many around the world for its ride, 

its gentleness and its endurance. We believe Congressman 

Whitfield’s proposed legislation is based more on perception than 

on sound science. We believe it is excessive and will damage the 

industry significantly and potentially eliminate the performance 

horse altogether. I urge you to find sensible solutions to this issue. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:] 

7 


87602.001
8 


87602.002
9 


87602.003
10 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. 

At this time, Mr. Irby, you are recognized for your 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MARTY IRBY 

Mr. IRBY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ms. 

Schakowsky, and other members. My name is Marty Irby and I 

served as the President of the Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders 

and Exhibitors Association from December of 2010 until December 

of 2012 and currently serve as an International Director. But today 

I am here representing myself. In addition, last night I was informed that I have been selected as the nominated President for 

2014 of the Association. I have owned Racking Horse World Grand 

Champions and have judged the Spotted Saddle Horse World 

Grand Championship. All three of these breeds are affected by this 

legislation that I fully support. 

In 1955, my grandfather veterinarian obtained his first Tennessee Walking Horse and joined the association I later became 

President of. At the age of 3, I was first placed on a Tennessee 

Walking Horse, and at the age of 5, I first began competing in 

World Grand Championship competitions. Since childhood, I have 

observed the horrific practice of soring, and my father taught me 

how to sore a horse at the age of 13. Soring padded performance 

horses is ingrained within our culture. From my personal and public stance, I have suffered many losses. Even family members have 

turned against me. I ask that you not let these efforts be in vain. 

I am here to prevent the extinction of the Tennessee Walking 

Horse, and I believe this bill must pass the House of Representatives and Senate. 

I have seen horses’ feet in the past on many occasions look like 

pizza with the cheese pulled off the top of it. That is how horrific 

this practice is. I have listened to thousands of people—breeders, 

trainers, exhibitors and owners—who want change within our industry. Poll after political continues to show that the majority favor 

this bill. During my 8 years of service in various positions, I tried 

to move forward and move our breed in a new direction from within and was unsuccessful with my attempts. Therefore, I am here 

before you today to ask Congress to please help save our breed. 

Other breeds may be doing well in Tennessee and their numbers 

may be good but the Tennessee Walking Horse is not doing well. 

Over the past 10 years, our membership has declined from more 

than 20,000 to 8,300 or less. In 2006, when I was an International 

Director, we failed to crown a World Grand Champion because 

most of the horses were disqualified and deemed sore and in violation of the Horse Protection Act by the United States Department 

of Agriculture. In 2010, when I served as Vice President of Marketing, we were kicked out of the World Equestrian Games in Kentucky, and our $25,000 sponsorship check was returned due to the 

soring issues and utilization of stacks and chains. 

Our greatest fault for many decades as a breed is that we have 

been trying to save the padded performance horse. Recently I discussed this with a friend, and I said we tried and tried to save the 

performance horse and now it is about saving the breed. He said, 

well, shouldn’t that have been what it was about all along? That 

spoke volumes to me. 

11 

At this point in time and as I have progressed, I have realized 

that we must let go of the sore padded performance horse and step 

soundly into the future or we will not realize any future at all. 

In May of 2012, I was as President faced with perhaps the most 

critical decision that has ever faced our breed: should I continue to 

perpetuate the lie that padded and chained horses are mostly 

sound—— 

Mr. TERRY. Will you pull the microphone a little closer? I just 

heard that they can’t hear you in the control room. 

Mr. IRBY. Should I continue to perpetuate the lie that padded 

and chained performance Tennessee Walking Horses are mostly 

sound and only a few bad apples sore them, or should I recognize 

the truth, that most all of them have been sored or are sore. This 

question came into mind after the ABC expos AE1e Nightline that 

you saw earlier. I was President that day and happened to be in 

Wemding, Germany, judging a horse show and saw the world’s reaction from the outside of this horrific practice. I knew that day 

that things must change, and the brutal beating and soring and 

electric prodding of horses like people like Jackie McConnell have 

done need to stop. I have known Jackie McConnell since I was 5 

years old and my family was friends with him. 

This event became the Tylenol crisis of the Tennessee Walking 

Horse breed and the negative stigma associated with our breed due 

to soring has caused the value of yearling colts to drop from 

$20,000 or more to many just to $300 to $500 in a few years. Our 

breed records reflect that last year we bred a small fraction of the 

number of mares we bred 8 years ago. Our lack of ability to selfregulate over the past 43 years has brought our breed to this crossroads. I have observed more corruption in soring horses, corrupt inspections, corrupt judging, corrupt training methods, corrupt business practices intertwined with this industry than I have seen anywhere on this earth, and this has nearly destroyed our great breed. 

It is now time someone took action to save our breed and make 

our economy grow again. An economy based on criminal activity is 

not healthy for our industry and not healthy for our country. For 

this to happen, the mechanically created and artificial gait known 

as the Big Lick must cease to exist along with pads, action devices 

and soring so that this dark cloud can be removed from our breed. 

In addition, the HIO inspection system should be eliminated so 

that the self-regulation can go away and things can be done in the 

right manner. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and appreciate the time to be here 

today and testify before you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Irby follows:] 

12 


87602.004
13 


87602.005
14 


87602.006
15 


87602.007
16 


87602.008
17 


87602.009
18 


87602.010
19 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. 

Dr. DeHaven, you are recognized for your 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF W. RON DEHAVEN 

Dr. DEHAVEN. Thank you, Chairman Terry, Ranking Member 

Schakowsky and members of the subcommittee. I am here today 

both as a veterinarian and also as a representative of the American 

Veterinary Medical Association. Mr. Chairman, while I will be giving an abbreviated statement, I request that my full written testimony be included in the hearing record. 

Mr. TERRY. So ordered. 

Dr. DEHAVEN. The AVMA is the recognized voice of our Nation’s 

veterinarians, representing more than 84,000 members, or roughly 

80 percent of all veterinarians in the United States. My testimony 

today, though, also represents the joint efforts between AVMA and 

the American Association of Equine Practitioners. Together we are 

committed to upholding the health and welfare of our Nation’s 

horses. 

I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today as I believe I have a very unique perspective, having been engaged in this 

issue since very early in my career. Prior to the AVMA, I was the 

Administrator with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal 

and Plant Health Inspection Service and had national responsibility for enforcement of the Horse Protection Act. But even before 

that, my first role with the USDA was as a field veterinary medical 

officer, where I gained 6 years of boots-on-the-ground experience 

enforcing the Horse Protection Act and working at horse shows. I 

know the walking horse industry and its problems from the ground 

up. 

I want to thank Congressman Whitfield for his leadership in introducing and championing H.R. 1518, the Prevent All Soring Act, 

or PAST Act. I believe it represents a unique opportunity to once 

and for all end the cruel and inhumane practice of soring our Nation’s walking horses. I have witnessed the long-lasting and damaging effects that soring has on horses and feel that this bill is necessary in order to stop this culture of abuse that has existed for 

more than 40 years in the walking horse industry. 

All of us know what soring is and that it is an unethical and inhumane practice, and it involves deliberately inflicting pain to exaggerate the leg motion of some gaited horses but especially Tennessee Walking Horses, Spotted Saddle Horses and Racking 

Horses. Not only is it inhumane but it is also unethical, giving an 

advantage to those trainers who use the practice to achieve this 

unnatural gait known as the Big Lick. 

Horses can be sored with chemicals, which are typically caustic 

liquids applied to the horse’s lower leg, making that leg sensitive 

to the touch. Action devices, which are bracelet-like chains or rollers, are then placed on the legs and then strike that area of the 

pastern, exacerbating the pain that has already been sored. Although there is little reason to use these chains in the show ring 

unless a horse has been sored, the current law still permits their 

use. 

Horses can also be sored using physical methods, resulting in 

pain when the horse’s hoof strikes the ground. A few examples of 

20 

this include improperly trimming the hoof to expose sensitive tissues, placing foreign objects such as metal bolts between the shoe 

pads and the sole of the foot, or improper shoeing techniques. Performance packages or the so-called stacks and pads are often nailed 

to the horse’s natural hoof and secured by a metal band that runs 

across the hoof wall. That adds weight to the horse’s leg, causing 

the hoof to strike with more force and also at an abnormal angle. 

These pads can also be used to conceal foreign objects that apply 

painful pressure to the sole of the horse’s foot. 

Soring is detected through visual and manual inspections and 

through the use of various types of technology. Even so, unethical 

trainers and owners have developed creative ways to avoid detection. These include but are not limited to the use of numbing 

agents on the horse’s legs to mask the pain during the inspection. 

The use of harsh or even painful training methods called 

stewarding that teaches the horse if they flinch or otherwise show 

evidence of pain during inspection, that they will be subject to even 

more severe abuse. 

Looking back, Congress recognized the importance of stopping 

this egregious practice when they passed the Horse Protection Act 

with the goal of ending this practice. Unfortunately, the law did 

not go far enough. Many factors including unethical trainers and 

owners who continue to sore, show judges who reward this bad behavior, and insufficient funding as well as strong political influences, all of these have contributed to a culture of corruption within the walking horse industry, and that is what allows soring to 

continue today. Many trainers and owners feel in fact that they 

must sore if they are going to be competitive. 

One of the major drawbacks of the current enforcement program 

is reliance on the walking horse industry to police itself. This is the 

proverbial fox watching the henhouse. Industry inspectors commonly have inherent conflicts of interest and therefore it can be to 

their advantage to let a sore horse into the show ring. Indeed, a 

2008 white paper by the American Association of Equine Practitioners as well as the 2010 USDA OIG report confirm this assertion, and both of those reports called for the ending of this self-policing practice. The data submitted with my written testimony 

shows violation rates vary from year to year, but I want to draw 

your attention to several points. First, violation rates are never 

zero. Second, oversight by USDA veterinarians shows that inspectors are much more likely to find violations when in fact they have 

oversight. 

This legislation is endorsed by more than 100 organizations including every veterinary medical association at the State level and 

the United States. Thus, it means that every member of this subcommittee has constituents who are veterinarians that want this 

bill passed. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank you to the committee for 

this opportunity to testify on behalf of the American Veterinary 

Medical Association. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. DeHaven follows:] 

21 


87602.011
22 


87602.012
23 


87602.013
24 


87602.014
25 


87602.015
26 


87602.016
27 


87602.017
28 


87602.018
29 


87602.019
30 


87602.020
31 


87602.021
32 


87602.022
33 


87602.023
34 


87602.024
35 


87602.025
36 


87602.026
37 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. 

Dr. Bennett, you are now recognized for your 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN BENNETT 

Dr. BENNETT. Thank you. Chairman Terry, Ranking Member 

Schakowsky and members of the committee, I thank you for the opportunity to be here and discuss H.R. 1518 and impact it would 

have on the walking horse industry. 

I have been a licensed veterinarian for 33 years, and currently 

I am licensed in the States of Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, 

Alabama, and Florida. I am a member of the AVMA, the AAEP, 

Kentucky Veterinary Medical Association, the Tennessee Veterinary Medical Association, the Florida Association of Equine Petitioners, Tennessee Walking Horse Breeders and Exhibitors Association, and also a member of TCVM, which is Traditional Chinese 

Veterinary Medicine, which correlates to I do acupuncture. I have 

also been a veterinarian for the Humane Society of the United 

States to look after the horses that were confiscated from the Jackie McConnell stables in West Tennessee. I have also been a veterinarian for the Humane Society of the United States for horses confiscated in East Tennessee from the Larry Wheeling stables. I have 

also worked for the USDA and their annual training programs to 

train the inspectors, the DQPs, that inspect the horses. I have 

taught classes at those courses. I go through all that merely to say 

that I am the one person on this panel that every day is out there 

where the rubber meets the road. My practice is located in Shelbyville, Tennessee. Up to 60 percent of it is made up of Tennessee 

Walking Horses. The rest are Western Performance Horses, American Saddlebreds, Hunter Jumpers, occasional mule and miniature, 

I guess to keep me humble. 

One thing that I would bring out after we saw the video, nobody 

in this room should put up with animal cruelty of whatever breed 

at all. But make no mistake, the Horse Protection Act as it is written today and as it is being proposed today would have no jurisdiction over either one of those cases. The industry, as Mr. Whitfield 

says, has data that says we are 98 percent compliant. The USDA 

data says we are 96.6 percent compliant. The reason I am here 

today is, I feel like that the industry is moving forward. 

On the other hand, I get asked if you are opposed to H.R. 1518, 

then you are for soring horses. That is absolutely not the case. 

There is not a person on this panel or in this room that doesn’t 

view soring as a cancer on this industry. As a medical professional, 

I prefer to cut it out with a scalpel blade. H.R. 1518 wants to use 

a chainsaw. 

I was lucky enough in the fall of 2012 to meet in southern Kentucky with Congressman Whitfield to discuss the same issues that 

we have today, and I too wonder after 40-some years and in the 

pat year since we met, why are we still having these problems? 

And I would submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, in my opinion, 

I think the technology has caught up with horse training. Now I 

think it is time for the Horse Protection Act to catch up to the technology. 

38 

I would invite each and every one of you at any time, you don’t 

have to call ahead, come down and ride with me, see what I see. 

You have got an open invitation. 

And with that said, I do want to thank you for the opportunity 

to be here, and I will do my very best to answer any questions you 

have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Bennett follows:] 

39 


87602.027
40 


87602.028
41 


87602.029
42 


87602.030
43 


87602.031
44 


87602.032
45 


87602.033
46 


87602.034
47 


87602.035
48 


87602.036
49 


87602.037
50 


87602.038
51 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Dr. Bennett. 

Ms. Benefield, you are now recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF DONNA BENEFIELD 

Ms. BENEFIELD. I would like to thank Chairman Terry and Ranking Member Schakowsky and distinguished members of the subcommittee for giving me the opportunity to testify here today. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to request that my written testimony 

and exhibits be admitted into the official record. 

Mr. TERRY. All members, your statements will be entered into 

the record. 

Ms. BENEFIELD. My name is Donna Benefield, and I am the Vice 

President of the International Walking Horse Association. I have 

been involved in the administration of four USDA-certified inspection programs over the past 25 years. I have inspected thousands 

of horses for compliance with the Horse Protection Act and its regulations. I have been in hundreds of meetings here in Washington, 

D.C., with the USDA and the Tennessee Walking Horse Industry 

to achieve reform in the industry and compliance with the federal 

law. 

When Congress passed the Act in 1970, their intent was to eradicate soring, not regulate it, as is being done under the current 

horse protection regulations. On April 27, 1979, the Federal Register published the following: ‘‘If the horse industry makes no effort 

to establish a workable self-regulatory program for the elimination 

of sore horses or if such a program is established but does not succeed in eliminating the sore horse problem within a reasonable 

length of time, the Department will give serious consideration to 

the prohibition of all action devices and pads.’’ 

This industry has had over 40 years to rid itself of this abuse, 

and for numerous reasons has not only resisted, but has refused reform at every turn. They have maintained, controlled and regulated 

soring through fear and intimidation for decades. Back in the 

1980s, there were headlines on the front page of the Nashville Tennessean newspaper regarding death threats on me. The FBI became involved, and arranged protection for my husband and me for 

many years. In the 1990s, we had a horse killed. Years later another horse was poisoned at a horse show. 

Due to the time constraints, I am going to share with you only 

a few things that are done to these horses to enhance their gait 

and to avoid detection of a violation of the Horse Protection Act. 

What they do to sore a horse: caustic chemicals are applied to the 

pasterns—ankles, the cannon bone, or the shin of the horse, then 

wrap the legs in plastic for 24 to 48 hours. They are tied to the 

wall. They put duct tape around the wraps to prevent the horse 

from chewing the wraps off their burning legs, due to the intense 

pain. They will use an electric grinder to sand the soles of the feet 

down to the quick until beads of blood come to the surface before 

applying the shoe. They will insert foreign objects between the 

soles of the horse’s feet and stacks. They will pressure shoe a horse 

by standing the horse on steel bolts or wooden blocks. They will 

sand a strip of the hoof wall down to the quick, apply a band across 

the top of the area and tighten it down with a screwdriver to create 

52 

pressure on the sensitive hoof wall or to create additional pressure 

to the sole of the pressure-shod horse. 

I have seen the bands sheared off the hoof near the top of the 

hoof many times, leaving the horse standing on a bloody nub in a 

pool of blood in the show ring. At a recent seminar, one of the industry vets instructed attendees what supplies to have in their 

grooming kit so that they were prepared when this happens. 

The reason why these things are not detected during inspection, 

they steward the horses. Stewarding is when a person will do a 

mock inspection of the horse’s pasterns while another person will 

hold the horse. When the horse reacts to the pain, the person will 

hit the horse in the head with a two by four, an ax handle or a 

baseball bat, among other things, until he stops reacting to the 

pain. I have seen this many times. He then has been taught not 

to react during the inspection at the horse show, as seen on the 

ABC Nightline show with Jackie McConnell that you just saw. 

They use numbing agents applied topically or injected by the trainer or a sympathetic industry vet to block the pain at shows. They 

will allow alligator clips to the scrotum, anus, vulva, tongue, tail 

or the teats of the horse to create a painful distraction during the 

inspection. They put zip ties or piano wire on the gums of the horse 

and pull it very tight, creating pain to take their mind off of the 

pain on their feet. They use glue-on hair, tattooing, sprays, graphite among other things to hide the illegal scars. They put bit burrs 

under the saddle girth and cinch the girth up tight to create pain 

to distract the horse. Salicylic acid is used to remove scars. They 

slather a paste of salicylic acid and alcohol, Cut-Heal or DMSO or 

whatever onto the pastern, wrap them in plastic for 24 to 48 hours 

to cook. The horse will typically lie in a stall, breaking out in a 

sweat, moaning with pain and resist getting to his feet. They then 

have to go into the stall and beat the horse to his feet, as was seen 

in the ABC Nightline Jackie McConnell show. After 48 hours, the 

will take the wraps off and the skin begins to slough off. They then 

begin the tedious process of literally combing the skin off of the leg, 

thereby hopefully putting the horse back into compliance with the 

current Horse Protection scar rule regulation. 

The AVMA and the AAEP recently issued a statement on the impact of the pads and chain: ‘‘What the science says is that raising 

the heels—placing a horse on pads and wedge—8 degrees can cause 

the horse to stumble and tire easily. Additionally, horses placed on 

pads and wedges showed inflammation in the flexor tendon area of 

the pastern. Chains that weigh 6 ounces will start to cause hair 

loss without the use of chemical irritants. Chains heavier than 6 

ounces used on horses that have been previously sored will cause 

open lesions within 2 weeks. We’re happy to say we did our homework and, yes, the science that’s available appears to support our 

position. However, the industry has once again missed the point of 

the AVMA’s and AAEP’s decision. The AVMA’s and AAEP’s primary concern—— 

Mr. TERRY. Please wrap up. 

Ms. BENEFIELD [continuing]. Is that the chains and pads are 

used to exacerbate and hiding soring. For this reason, the IWHA 

endorses this bill, and we are here today asking for the passage of 

53 

H.R. 1518 amendment to correct this chronic 43-year-old problem. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Benefield follows:] 

54 


87602.039
55 


87602.040
56 


87602.041
57 


87602.042
58 


87602.043
59 


87602.044
60 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. 

Ms. Bippen, you are now recognized for your 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF TERESA BIPPEN 

Ms. BIPPEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I ask that my testimony and exhibits be included in the official record. 

Mr. TERRY. And they will be. 

Ms. BIPPEN. Thank you. Friends of Sound Horses, or FOSH, is 

a nonprofit organization that is dedicated to ending the abuse of 

soring. FOSH is an umbrella organization of 15 gaited horse breeds 

including the Tennessee Walking Horse, Spotted Saddle Horse and 

Racking Horse. FOSH has been in existence since 1998 and supports the PAST Act. 

For its entire existence, FOSH has been committed to ending 

soring. During this time, FOSH has worked with the USDA, developed and populated the largest database in existence of HPA violations, built a public Web site with a library of all publications on 

soring since 1956, sponsored three Sound Horse Conferences, and 

researched numerous technology solutions to detect soring. 

Although we have often heard from the walking horse industry 

spokesmen that the problem of soring is the result of a few bad apples, the total number of HPA violation records is over 10,000 since 

the mid-1980s. This history of ongoing violations spans more than 

40 years, through trainers, entire families, old and new names, and 

this is why FOSH has reached the conclusion, as have the other 

endorsers of this bill, that legislative change is the only solution to 

end the plague of soring. 

FOSH is one of over two dozen national and international walking horse organizations that support the PAST Act. These organizations have been in existence for many years and do not allow 

padded and chained horses in their show rings. After trying to 

bring about change in the traditional show world for years, concerned exhibitors and spectators alike abandoned venues like The 

Celebration. Banning the padded and chained horse has allowed 

these organizations to thrive because exhibitors and spectators at 

their shows do not want to be surrounded by the abuse that occurs 

in the big lick show world nor do they want to exhibit with people 

who use illegal means to win a ribbon. 

Through its research and experience, FOSH has determined that 

a combination of weak inspections, conflicted DQPs and the failure 

of HIOs to report violations has created a culture of acceptance in 

exhibiting sored horses, which routinely hides and misrepresents 

the data to deceive Congress and the public about the widespread 

nature of the problem. 

A few specific examples of the lack of compliance with the Act 

among the Big Lick segment of the industry include the USDA reported that at the 2012 Celebration in a random swabbing for signs 

of foreign, prohibited substances, 145 swab samples of 190 tested 

positive for foreign substances. This is a 76 percent noncompliance 

rate. Celebration management, however, announced to the public 

in news releases that it would be swabbing every horse on the 

grounds for prohibited foreign substances. They reported only two 

positive swab samples in almost 2,000 entries while the USDA 

found 145 in a sample of only 190 horses. Based on examples such 

61 

as this one, FOSH has concluded that the current HIO system is 

broken, or else there would not be such a large discrepancy between the USDA samples and those of the Celebration. 

During 2010, 2011, and half of 2012, the violation rate for three 

compliant HIOs—FOSH, International Walking Horse Association 

and National Walking Horse Association—was only .02 percent, or 

only eight violations out of over 42,000 inspections. These three 

compliant HIOs have perfect inspection records when their shows 

are attended and audited by the USDA. By contrast, the violation 

rate at the 2012 Celebration was 9 percent, which is 450 times 

greater than that of the compliant HIOs. 

In August this year, the USDA released figures for the show season through April 2013 that further support passage of PAST. Of 

241 HPA violations, 93 percent of the violations were on padded 

horses. Not only that, but when the USDA inspectors were present 

at shows this year, the HPA violation rate was 280 percent greater 

than when the rate at shows at which USDA was not there. 

It is the conclusion also of FOSH that weak penalties imposed 

by noncompliant HIOs are meaningless and do not serve as deterrents. As an example, the top five 2013 Riders Cup contenders 

share 94 reported HPA violations as reported at the publicly available Web site, HPAdata.us. 

Another factor influencing FOSH’s support of stronger penalties 

is the repeat violator list generated by that same Web site. This 

repeat-violator list is 260 pages long single-spaced. Much stronger 

penalties are needed to serve as a deterrent as the current penalty 

structure has been meaningless and ignored by violators for many 

years. 

While FOSH has been a part of efforts to save the Tennessee 

Walking, Racking and Spotted Saddle industries by providing a 

network of horse shows where competitors train horses humanely 

and play fairly and in compliance with the law, we have noticed 

that the stigma associated with the problems in the Big Lick industry has caused economic harm to our breeds. Because most true 

horsemen do not want to be associated in any way with animal 

abuse or illegal activity, fewer horses are being bred, raised, 

trained, shod, boarded, fed, treated with veterinary care and shown 

in our breeds. The negative impact on the economy caused by the 

ongoing presence of soring and the failure of the Horse Protection 

Act to eradicate the problem is far reaching. The PAST Act is needed to fix the deficiency in the current law, restore honor to the 

breeds afflicted by soring and bring more people and dollars back 

into the horse industry. 

In closing, FOSH reiterates that its experience, analysis and research have led it to strongly support PAST, which provides for 

greater penalties, abolishment of the HIO system and elimination 

of devices that are an integral part of the abuse of soring. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bippen follows:] 

62 


87602.045
63 


87602.046
64 


87602.047
65 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Ms. Bippen. 

Now, Mr. Hickey, you are now recognized for your 5 minutes, 

and your statement will be part of the record. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES J. HICKEY 

Mr. HICKEY. Thank you very much for the opportunity to present 

this testimony on behalf of the American Horse Council in support 

of the Prevent All Soring Tactics Act of 2013. 

My name is Jay Hickey. I am the President of the American 

Horse Council. We are a Washington-based organization that represents the horse industry here in D.C. before Congress and the 

federal regulatory agencies. Our organization’s members include organizations that represent show, racing, recreation and stakeholders. 

You have already heard about soring and its mechanics, the pain 

it causes the horses, the Horse Protection Act, the continued problems with soring in segments of certain breeds in the bill at issue. 

I would like to explain the position of the American Horse Council 

and how we came to support this legislation. 

It seems strange that an industry would come to the federal government and support additional regulations but there are good reasons for that. When the original bill was introduced at the end of 

last Congress, the AHC felt it was worthy of review. We asked two 

of our committees, our animal welfare committee and our horse 

show committee, to review it. After meetings, numerous calls, 

emails, lengthy discussions and serious considerations, it was clear 

that there was strong support for this bill. I think simply stated, 

everybody felt it was an idea whose time had finally come. The two 

AHC committees recommended that the board support it, and we 

now do. 

Why do we support this legislation? We support it because soring 

continues. We have heard testimony about the USDA OIG study. 

We have heard testimony that a meaningful percent of horses in 

the performance or Big Lick sector of the walking horse industry 

are still being sored despite efforts to stop it. Many actions have 

been initiated over the last 40 years to end this practice, new organizations formed, new promises made, but the problem persists. We 

support this legislation because soring is garnering more and more 

adverse and unnecessary publicity for the horse show industry at 

large. 

Witness the press about Jackie McConnell and Larry Wheeling 

and others. This affects the non-walking horse sector of the show 

industry. The public sees other breeds doing an animated gait and 

thinks it is a walking horse and being sored rather than performing its natural gait. That reflects badly on the entire show 

horse industry. 

We support this legislation because federal law to prohibit soring 

has been on the books for 43 years but it continues in a segment 

of the walking horse industry. Everyone maintains that they oppose soring but there are differences of opinion on how to stop it. 

Almost on the date the Act was passed 43 years ago, these differences have been discussed, debated, argued, litigated, lobbied, 

and been the subject of federal rulemaking. The discussion has become toxic within the horse industry. The AHC and major show orVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jan 30, 2015 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 113\113-91 CHRIS
66 

ganizations now believe it is time for the controversy to stop and 

that only a change to the existing federal law can stop it. 

Finally, and most importantly, we support this legislation because it is the right thing to do for the horses. 

The AHC believes that we need a federal change to the Horse 

Protection Act, a change to eliminate action devices and stacks in 

the Big Lick and performance sectors of the walking horse industry, a change to inaugurate a new inspection program that will rely 

on independent professionals including accredited veterinarians to 

inspect the horses involved rather than continuing the current 

failed DQP program, and a change to provide for uniform and 

strong penalties including disqualification for life if it comes to 

that. The Prevent All Soring Tactics Act is the answer. The PAST 

Act is a narrowly drafted bill that is focused on soring and limited 

to the problem it is trying to solve. It will change the federal law 

to end the bickering and debate, reform the regulatory system and 

finally eliminate soring. The PAST Act does not adversely affect or 

unnecessarily burden other segments of the show horse industry 

that are not soring horses and have no history of soring horses. 

The following major horse show organizations support the PAST 

Act: American Association of Equine Practitioners, American Morgan Horse Association, the American Paint Horse Association, 

American Quarter Horse Association, Appaloosa Horse Club, Arabian Horse Association, Pinto Horse Association of America, American Saddlebred Horse Association, U.S. Equestrian Federation, 

United Professional Horsemen’s Association. There are others, but 

those are national organizations. That is a large part of the show 

horse industry. 

For those of you who are familiar with the horse industry, it is 

an industry famous for a lack of uniformity on anything, lack of 

unanimity on anything, but in this case, there is amazing consensus and support of the PAST Act. We ask you to pas this legislation. After 43 years of federal regulation and soring continuing, 

it is the right thing to do. We must stop soring, the culture of 

soring, and pass this legislation. Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hickey follows:] 

67 


87602.048
68 


87602.049
69 


87602.050
70 


87602.051
71 


87602.052
72 


87602.053
73 


87602.054
74 


87602.055
75 


87602.056
76 


87602.057
77 


87602.058
78 


87602.059
79 


87602.060
80 


87602.061
81 


87602.062
82 


87602.063
83 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, and all time for the witnesses has concluded, and so at this time it is our opportunity to follow up and 

ask questions to the panel. As chairman, I get to go first. 

So it seems to me that listening and reading your testimony, it 

boils down into two distinct camps. Maybe ‘‘camp’’ is too strong of 

a word. Everyone seems to agree that the tactics process that we 

witnessed in the video clip and that we have read about is horrible 

and should not be part of the walking horse industry. Where there 

seems to be a spilt between the testimony here is the need for any 

additional layer of legislation or H.R. 1518 specifically. 

So I think for me, that is where I want to kind of dive down into 

is why there is opposition to this bill. Now, Commissioner Johnson, 

you mentioned in your testimony that there is a problem, although 

it is small, and that there are reasonable solutions. Could you be 

more specific in what you think would be the better solution? Turn 

on your microphone. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Really, this is an area that I am not an expert in 

that I look to those who are the experts, and Dr. Bennett has long 

been recognized as one of those experts that I consult with, and I 

would like to him to answer those kind of questions. But I don’t 

feel like I have the expertise. 

Mr. TERRY. I appreciate that. 

So Dr. Bennett, you established your credibility and expertise in 

an impressive way. So you also mentioned that this bill is not necessary and perhaps goes too far. Would you clarify, A, is there 

something that should be done? What part of this bill—is any part 

of H.R. 1518 do you think appropriate and would be effective in 

stopping these procedures? 

Dr. BENNETT. Thank you for the opportunity, and great questions. I would think the greatest part about H.R. 1518 has got us 

in this room so we can discuss this problem. Now, with that said, 

Mrs. Benefield, who I consider a friend, brought up the fact, just 

one thing, I am not going to go through the list, but spurs under 

their saddles. They go through inspections now, the saddles have 

to be off. That is mandated. The other thing that I would see is like 

I said, we have science and technology. I have got three digital Xray machines that can shoot X-rays and have the results in 6 seconds. I have got three thermography cameras. That measures the 

physiology of the horse. X-rays measure the anatomy. That is 

science. There is swabbing that you will hear about. There is machines out there—— 

Mr. TERRY. Do you X-ray? Is this process done before every show 

or is this just when an accusation has been brought up that you 

will go the extent of using this new technology? 

Dr. BENNETT. The walking horse industry themselves does not 

have X-ray machines at their inspections. The USDA when they 

come in bring their X-ray machines and veterinarians and they 

have the option to X-ray at their discretion. And that kind of came 

up—if I may, this kind of came up on the X-rays over a 1979 study 

from Michigan State University on laminitis. 

Mr. TERRY. We play them this Saturday, so I hope you say that 

you want them to lose. Go forward, though. 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, Kentucky lost basketball and not doing good. 

But anyway, this is a 1979 study that had to do with horses that 

84 

had laminitis and if they could come back and be in the show ring. 

Anybody that does equine podiatry or works on horses’ feet, the 

science is well past that now. So that is one rule that we are boxed 

into with radiographs. The good thing is, is the bolts that are 

under there or any of those things, the X-rays pick those up. You 

can see them right there on the spot. And that is what I would like 

to get across is, let us get the science and catch those horses with 

science objectively before they go in the show ring. 

Mr. TERRY. How about the issue that was brought up with conflict of interest with the inspectors? Is there a way to resolve that? 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, it can be resolved. The thing is, they hammer 

me with 40-some years of history, and I can’t argue that. That is 

the reason I am here. I don’t like soring. The problem we have got 

is with the show, HIO, that Mr. Whitfield was alluding to that it 

was started in 2009 as a result of the AAEP white paper made the 

inspectors sign a non-conflict of interest. There are steps in place, 

but that is one HIO. There are 13 HIOs. Who certifies those HIOs? 

The USDA. I get hammered all the time at these meetings I go to. 

We need one HIO. I agree. I agree 100 percent. But there are 13. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. 

Now the ranking member, Ms. Schakowsky, has 5 minutes. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you. Actually, we are, I think, seeing 

two different worlds, one that says no problem, this may have been 

a problem, isn’t a problem anymore, and another that says that 

this is ongoing. 

Ms. Benefield, I wanted to ask you, how do you account for the 

testimony that we have heard that the walking horse industry is 

approaching 98 percent compliance rate, 96 percent compliance 

with regard to soring that they claim, the discrepancy in what you 

see happening? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Well, what goes on with a lot of those horses is, 

trainers or veterinarians will go in and actually numb the horses 

on the show grounds prior to inspection with topical applications 

of creams or sprays or they will actually inject them with numbing 

agents to get them through inspection in addition to the stewarding 

that I discussed. So the horse is now trained to pas the inspection 

and not elicit a pain response. That will interrupt your percentage 

rates significantly, and also, the rates that they are counting on 

are based on entries. For example, if you have 10 horses at a horse 

show and that horse goes in one class and he is inspected and 

turned down, that would be a 10 percent noncompliant rate, but if 

that horse goes in 10 classes each, that is 100 horses and those of 

the 100 entries, so now you are looking at a 1 percent. So they dilute the percentages by calling them entries when horses go in 

multiple classes rather than calling them just individual horse individuals. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Well, how do you know this is happening still? 

Dr. Bennett says the technologies have caught up and that isn’t 

happening anymore. How do you know it is happening? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Well, I have witnessed it. In fact, at the Celebration, when I worked at the Celebration in 2010, I observed a veterinarian prior to a class actually injecting the horse with numbing 

agents prior to inspection. 

85 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. All right. Dr. Bennett, just real quickly because I have another question for—— 

Dr. BENNETT. It makes no sense to numb a horse. One reason is 

that we want the exaggerated gait. If you numb his legs, Dr. 

DeHaven is a licensed veterinarian, he can tell you, they are not 

going to pick their feet up. The second thing is, if we have the 

swabbing and the technology, we can check for those numbing 

agents right there on the spot. Thank you. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Irby, you have been associated with this 

industry for such a long time and yet you are here today supporting the legislation. What have you observed? 

Mr. IRBY. Over the past year, I actually kind of did my own informal study because I did at one time stand up for the padded performance horse, so I went around from barn to barn and saw that 

the majority of all of the trainers were either still soring horses, 

would even tell you what they were doing, applying hand cleaners, 

WD–40 and kerosene and mustard oil and things like that to their 

feet, and went all over middle Tennessee, parts of Kentucky, Alabama and other States, and my conclusion was that the majority 

of everybody, if not everybody, is still soring horses today in the 

padded performance division and that I could not find one single 

padded performance horse that had not been sored at some point 

in their life. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Could you speak to the economic motivation 

for trainers to sore and for the Horse Industry Organizations to 

turn a blind eye to the practice? 

Mr. IRBY. The main economic factor is that by soring a horse, a 

trainer can take a colt that might go buy that is 16 or 18 months 

old and take him to a training barn and within 90 days a colt that 

they purchased for $500 to $5,000 they could sell for as high as 

$100,000. So it is a way for them to make a quick buck but it is 

a detriment to the industry, and it is only about their personal 

gain. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you. I wanted to ask Ms. Bippen a 

question. You had talked about at the end of your testimony that 

there was an economic benefit to the breeds that your represent to 

end this practice. How do you explain that, that it would actually 

be beneficial? Because we are hearing testimony how important it 

is not to have further inspections. 

Ms. BIPPEN. Yes. The stigma that has attached to Tennessee 

Walking Horses has caused quite a few people to not want to own 

those horses, and even myself when I explain I have Tennessee 

Walking Horses, I have to explain that they are not show horses 

and they ask, are they the ones where they take those pads and 

those chains and they put them in a show ring. So I believe that 

the Tennessee Walking Horse has a fabulous disposition and many 

more people should own one, but they just do not want to be associated with that soring, and they don’t want to have to worry about 

participating in shoes where soring takes place. So without that 

stigma, I believe that industry could grow substantially. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. And my time is about up. Thank you very 

much, all of you, for your testimony. 

86 

Mr. LANCE [presiding]. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes the vice chair of the full committee, Congresswoman 

Blackburn of Tennessee. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Hickey, thanks for being here. You are testifying on behalf 

of the American Horse Council, correct? 

Mr. HICKEY. Correct. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. Now, you are testifying for ending the 

practice of soring, correct? 

Mr. HICKEY. Correct. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. Now, the major contributing—— 

Mr. TERRY. I have to interrupt. Will you pull the microphone 

closer? 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. The major contributing industry to the 

Horse Council is the Thoroughbred industry, right? 

Mr. HICKEY. No. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Oh, it isn’t? 

Mr. HICKEY. No. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. I have information that it is, and of 

course, the Thoroughbred industry has had over 3,000 horses die 

in the last 4 years, died on the track. So you are saying there is 

a presumed problem with the Tennessee Walking Horse, and I 

would like to ask you why you think that is worse than the issue 

that exists with what the stats would say is the problem with the 

Thoroughbred industry? 

Mr. HICKEY. Well, I am testifying today on the PAST Act. I believe that next week you will have a hearing on the other bill that 

Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Whitfield have involving medication in 

racing. That would be, I think, a more appropriate question then. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Let me move on. 

Mr. HICKEY. But let me just say—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. No, let me move on with my questioning. Let 

me reclaim my time. 

OK. With the number of deaths in the Thoroughbred industry, 

I am curious as to how you can be a proponent for self-regulation 

in the Thoroughbred industry but you are not a proponent for selfregulation in the walking horse industry. 

Mr. HICKEY. Well, I am not sure that self-regulation is correct. 

I am a proponent for amending the Horse Protection Act, which 

has been a federal law in existence for 43 years, to amend it very 

narrowly, I might point out, to prohibit and finally stop soring, 

which was passed 43 years ago to try to do. It has not worked. So 

that was my testimony there. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. Then—— 

Mr. HICKEY. We are—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Let me reclaim my time and move on with 

questions then. So if you are for that, now, let me ask you this, 

would the American Horse Council support the use of action devices and pads in the other competitive areas where these may be 

used with other show breeds, and what makes the action device 

and pad used in the walking horse industry different, and then 

should all breeds be banned from the use of action devices and 

pads? 

87 

Mr. HICKEY. Well, all breeds—other people help me with this, because this gets into some specific breed questions. Each breed regulates its own showing and classes. All other breeds prohibit the use 

of action device and the large pads and stacks that we are talking 

about today in the show ring. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. Let me—— 

Mr. HICKEY. It is only the performance horses—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN [continuing]. Move on to Dr. Bennett then and 

have him pick this up. 

Mr. HICKEY. Can I—one—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Sure. 

Mr. HICKEY. Soring would not be—and again, anybody else. 

Soring would not be appropriate or helpful in the activities and the 

classes and the shows of other breeds. In fact, it would be counterproductive. So this Act does not—although it applies to them, it 

does not apply to them in the same fashion. They don’t have—they 

are not regulated because they don’t sore their horses. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Reclaiming, and Dr. Bennett, you are recognized. Do the pad and action devices cause any harm to the horse? 

Dr. BENNETT. I have done exhaustive research myself as best I 

could, and I cannot find going back to the early 1970s any published scientific literature that says that package or pads on the 

Tennessee Walking Horses or the action device cause lameness 

and/or soring. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. And—— 

Dr. BENNETT. Is there an article out there? Possibly could be. I 

could not find it. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. In your 33 years of working as a veterinarian and working in the field of walking horse, has the condition 

of the horses competing in the ring improved with regard to compliance with the Horse Protection Act? 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, I can say that they have improved according 

to the Horse Protection Act, and I would like to comment about the 

slide that they show of the Tennessee Walking Horses going 

around the Celebration ring, and it makes you think that those 

horses are sore. Those horses that got in the ring have been 

through the most stringent inspection process of any horse. The 

horse that they want to show should be the one that got turned 

out. Just a sideline. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you. Yield back. 

Mr. TERRY. At this point we recognize the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Yarmuth. 

Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank all the witnesses for their testimony. I also want to thank my colleague, Mr. 

Whitfield, and also Congresswoman Schakowsky for their sponsorship of this bill, which I am proud to cosponsor. 

I would like to allow Mr. Hickey—it seemed like you wanted to 

make a distinction between this situation and Thoroughbred racing 

that you weren’t able to make. Would you like to elaborate on your 

answer? 

Mr. HICKEY. Well, I mean, we can go into the late afternoon if 

we are going to get into other legislation too, but the situation 

briefly, and I should not be testifying on this, but briefly, the medication legislation and horseracing, it comes down to whether you 

88 

should allow race-day medication or not. There is a huge controversy within the racing industry as to whether race-day medication is beneficial or is not beneficial, and that rages on. In the last 

2 years, the uniform rules on race-day medication has gone into effect in, I think, 11 different States and will go into effect and there 

will be uniform rules on January 1. Now, this is something for a 

future hearing, but I just wanted to point that out. There is no debate within the horse show industry as to whether soring, which 

is what we are talking about, is appropriate or not. 

Mr. YARMUTH. I also want to carry on the conversation that the 

chairman started about the nature of the objections to the bill, because there are several misconceptions, it seems like, about what 

the bill—at least differences of opinion about what the bill does or 

doesn’t do, and you made the statement and others have made it 

that this really wouldn’t solve the problem because it doesn’t specifically relate to soring, but in Section 2(d)(1)(B), it clearly bans 

soring, I think, when it states that conduct ‘‘causing a horse to become sore or directing another person to cause a horse to become 

sore’’ is prohibited. Do you think that—— 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, I think what I was—— 

Mr. YARMUTH [continuing]. Is a sufficient definition? I am sorry. 

Go ahead. 

Dr. BENNETT. No, I am sorry. What I was alluding to is, there 

again, why are we still having this after 40 years? The problem 

that I see is that the inspection process is so subjective, and what 

happens is, a horse gets turned down, say for scar rule violation. 

If he gets a penalty from one HIO, that penalty is not recognized 

by another HIO so he can go somewhere else and show. The penalties and the subjectivity of the nature of the inspection is the 

problem I have. Let us get down to science, and we could get this 

solved. If we use industry numbers, we are at 98 percent. If we use 

USDA numbers, we are at 96 percent. We are making progress, 

and I have talked to the AAEP—I am an AAEP member—and they 

always say when industry decides that they can show that they 

want to help themselves, then we will be glad to jump in. We are 

getting there. We are not at the stage yet that I want to go and 

say hey, help us, here’s what we got. But we do have proof since 

2009 when we got the most stringent HIO in place, but what happened, when we penalized those people, they went somewhere else. 

It is like losing a driver’s license in this county but you can go to 

the next county and drive. It is an inconvenience but you can still 

drive. If you took their driver’s license away for the entire North 

America, then you have penalized them. Does that answer? 

Mr. YARMUTH. Doesn’t the original Act deal with transporting 

horses that have been sored, though? 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, and this is a very emotional issue when you 

start looking at the type of Jackie McConnell and all that, but 

there again, the Horse Protection Act doesn’t cover that. It covers 

transport, showing, exhibiting and offering public sale. 

Mr. YARMUTH. There obviously also is a dispute over the number 

of the incidents, the frequency, I guess, of soring, and the number 

is 97, 98 percent. Obviously Mr. Irby and Ms. Bippen have very different numbers. Do you want to elaborate? I know you have got 

lots of documentation that you—— 

89 

Ms. BIPPEN. Yes, I am happy to elaborate on that. We have been 

analyzing the data for quite a few years, and we always analyze 

it according to the number of horses at a show, as Ms. Benefield 

spoke about, so if you have 10 horses at a show and three of them 

are sored, we consider that a 30 percent noncompliance rate. However, recently the numbers that are coming to us are entries, so if 

those 10 horses were in 10 classes, that is 100 entries and they 

would say now that it is only a 3 percent noncompliance rate, and 

so those are the numbers that are coming back to us now from the 

noncompliant HIOs. We are unable to find out the actual number 

of horses entered. Now what they are giving us are the entry rates, 

and because the flat-shod horses are not sored generally and they 

are now becoming more popular, what they are going to do is boost 

up the sound horse rate for those groups. 

Mr. YARMUTH. I see. Mr. Irby, do you want to elaborate on that, 

because you obviously, at least anecdotally, have a very different 

opinion. 

Mr. IRBY. Yes, sir. I actually would like to comment. I can’t cite 

the numbers but if you see the stacks on the table here and the 

chains, this segment of our industry is where the problem is, and 

I think what Ms. Bippen is saying is, we don’t have this problem, 

we don’t see it hardly at all within the normal regularly shod Tennessee Walking Horse, which that entire division, all those divisions will still be left for the majority with this bill, and this bill 

eliminates this division where the majority of the problem is, which 

is less than 10 percent of our entire breed. Thank you. 

Mr. YARMUTH. I appreciate that. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth, and at this time recognize 

the vice chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Lance, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and good 

morning to you all, and let me say that I recognize the expertise 

of everybody on the panel. This is not an area that I know well, 

but certainly I will continue to review the testimony. 

I represent a district in New Jersey that includes the New Jersey 

area related to the horse industry. There are constituents of mine 

who this time of year ride to the hounds in places like 

Bernardsville and Far Hills and Bedminster and perhaps some on 

the panel are familiar with that area. Although I am from New 

Jersey and not from the South, I certainly respect and honor the 

great State of Tennessee. I was honored to go to law school in 

Nashville, and I have been in Shelbyville as a guest of Mrs. 

Prentice Cooper, the widow of one of your great Governors, whose 

son, Jim, is a colleague of ours here in Congress. Jim’s brother, 

William, and my wife and I were in law school together, and I have 

witnessed the performance in Shelbyville, I believe at the end of 

the summer, regarding the Tennessee Walking Horse. 

To Commissioner Johnson, is it possible to continue showing the 

Tennessee Walking Horse without soring? 

Mr. JOHNSON. I believe the industry has already proven that yes, 

it is, but certainly there are individuals, bad apples, bad actors in 

every kind of activity—— 

Mr. LANCE. Yes, of course, there are bad apples. Perhaps Congress is aware of that in its own responsibilities. 

90 

*The information has been retained in committee files and is also available at http:// 

docs.house.gov/meetings/if/if17/20131113/101469/hhrg-113-if17-20131113-sd004.pdf 

To Ms. Benefield, is it possible to continue to show the Tennessee 

Walking Horse, eliminating the abuses you suggest that exist? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Yes, I do believe that you can continue showing 

the walking horse without the abuse. You will notice that according 

to the records that Ms. Bippen has been expressing to you, there 

are a lot of shows around the United States that do not use the 

pad and chain, and for example, in California, a show at the Los 

Angeles Equestrian Center may have as many as 150 individual 

horses at a show, and they are all flat shod, and yet at another 

venue in Los Angeles they will have a padded show, and a big class 

for them would be two horses or one horse. So the flat-shod horse 

is continuing to show around the United States, and this problem 

seems to be more centralized in the South now. It used to be widespread around the United States but it has become more centralized. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you. Let me say not as a question but as a 

comment, I hope and expect that this is an area where people of 

good will can come together, and the purpose of this hearing is to 

elicit information from the distinguished members of the panel who 

are expert in this area, and I am hopeful, based upon the expertise 

of everyone on the panel, that a solution can occur, and let me repeat, I recognize the expertise of all on the panel and I do not believe that it is appropriate for one part of the Nation to point a finger at another part of the Nation, and I certainly want to work 

with everybody on the panel including those from the great State 

of Tennessee, a State that is very fond to me, and I look forward 

to continuing this discussion to protect what we need to protect regarding horses, and certainly that is true in New Jersey and particularly the district I serve. I yield back the balance of my time, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Mr. Lance. At this time I recognize the 

gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Long. 

Mr. LONG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have 

given the committee a series of statements from individuals who 

are deeply concerned about this issue but weren’t able to testify before the committee today. I ask unanimous consent that these 

statements be submitted for the record. 

Mr. TERRY. Without objection, so ordered. *

Mr. LONG. Technology has caught up with the training. I think, 

Mr. Irby, you talked about—or was that Dr. Bennett? OK. Can you 

elaborate on that a little bit? 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question. There again, 

why are we still having this discussion after 43 years? Why can’t 

we put it to rest? And in my opinion, the subjectivity of the inspection system along with 13 HIOs where there is no penalties that 

are transferred between them, it makes it a glass ceiling that we 

can’t get above, in my mind. The technology is there now. Before 

that horse goes in the show ring, he could be tested and make sure 

that there is no caustic chemicals that we heard about, no numbing 

agents that we heard about on there. We could X-ray them and 

make sure there is nothing under that pad. We can have failures 

91 

there that they can pull the shoes off and put them back on. The 

technology is there to stop this without taking the industry away. 

And I would argue with the 10 percent. I think if you read the H.R. 

1518, it is weighed shoes, pads, chains. They do make mention that 

you can still have a therapeutic pad or for protection but that is 

kind of vague to me. 

Mr. LONG. I have heard soring described in several different 

ways here today, but is it possible through this new technology 

that you are talking about to tell if they had been sored in the past 

and healed? Can they heal from this, or can you always see that 

there is signs where they have been sored in the past? 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, I think you are alluding to, sir, the change in 

tissue that we saw on the screen earlier, and remember, the skin 

is an organ just like your heart, just like your liver, just like—— 

Mr. LONG. But the skin doesn’t show up on an X-ray, does it? 

Dr. BENNETT. No, sir, but what I am getting to—— 

Mr. LONG. When you were talking about the X-rays earlier, I understand the deal about the bolts or whatever, but other than they, 

do they X-ray, or what are you looking for there as far as the 

soring? 

Dr. BENNETT. You could look for pressure shoeing, like Mrs. 

Benefield said, where they can take and rasp the sole down. We 

have parameters that we know that certain millimeters of sole 

depth is protective to the horse’s foot. We could measure that with 

digital X-rays. 

Mr. LONG. Also during your testimony, you offered to let us come 

ride with you which—— 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, sir. 

Mr. LONG [continuing]. Don’t offer, I will probably show up, so 

don’t invite me anywhere because I will always be there. But I 

didn’t get your point on what are we going to see in relation to this 

topic that would—— 

Dr. BENNETT. Yes, basically what I was getting to there is, come 

and see the horses with their clothes off and with their clothes on. 

Go to the barns and see how they are prepped and see how they 

are ridden and see them getting ready to go to the shows and go 

and see how they are inspected and the process that they go 

through to get into the show ring. 

Mr. LONG. OK. Thank you. 

And Mr. Irby, you said that—I don’t remember the fellow’s name 

now that was on the Nightline tape. How old that Nightline tape? 

Mr. IRBY. I believe it is from May of 2012. 

Mr. LONG. OK. And what is the fellow’s name that was—— 

Mr. IRBY. Jackie McConnell. 

Mr. LONG. OK. And you say that you are friends with him and 

have been ever since you were a little kid? 

Mr. IRBY. I haven’t spoken to him in a long, long time but I have 

known him because my parents have been friends with him—— 

Mr. LONG. Probably not since May of 2012. Your parents what? 

Mr. IRBY. They have been friends with him since I was 5 years 

old. 

Mr. LONG. OK. And someone like that, do they not have a reputation for — I mean, would they not have known before this 

Nightline tape came out? I mean, I would think that people in any 

92 

field if they are doing something that is untoward, illegal—I used 

to fish a lot of bass tournaments and there were people that were 

suspected of cheating and later proven to be cheating. Most people 

knew that they were cheating. Was this not known before this from 

this individual? 

Mr. IRBY. I believe it probably was known. He was actually on 

a federal suspension at the time and still participating in horse 

shows, and he is not the exception to the rule. He is the rule. Within the padded performance division, this is typically the way things 

are, and you pretty much have to cheat or you can’t compete. 

Mr. LONG. How can it be the rule if 98 percent are compliant? 

Mr. IRBY. That is mainly because of the masking agents I believe 

Ms. Benefield spoke about and things they can do to hide. I would 

probably have to defer to Dr. DeHaven or Ms. Benefield on that. 

Mr. LONG. Let me ask Ms. Benefield, on the numbing agents that 

you were talking about earlier, I kind of agree with Dr. Bennett. 

I mean, if you are trying to sore to make them pick up and do this, 

what do you call the gait again? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Big Lick. 

Mr. LONG. The Big Lick, if they are doing this Big Lick, how does 

numbing agents—I mean, why would that make them pick up their 

feet if their feet are numb? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. The numbing agents don’t in fact make them 

pick up their feet. What the trainers do is, back at the barn they 

will numb the horses legs and they will establish a window—— 

Mr. LONG. When you say back at the barn, are you talking about 

on the day of the event or are you talking about back at the barn 

at home? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Back at the barn in training, they will establish 

a window of when they put the numbing agent on and how long 

it takes for that numbing agent to wear off so that way they have 

a timing on when to put it on and how long they have before it 

wears off. So they time it in front of the time they are going to go 

into the class. 

Mr. LONG. A barn at the show or a barn at home? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. No, the barn at home. They are establishing 

their window. 

Mr. LONG. They numb it there? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Then they use that same window—— 

Mr. LONG. I am sorry? 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Then they use that same window for their application at the horse show so they know exactly the timing and when 

to put that agent on and when it will wear off so it will work— 

so it is no longer numbing the leg when they are in the show ring. 

Mr. LONG. Well, that is pretty good science if they can do that. 

I yield back. 

Ms. BENEFIELD. Well, they do. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you. Mr. Kinzinger, do you have any questions? 

Mr. KINZINGER. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. TERRY. Then the last person is Mr. Whitfield, and he is last 

because is actually not a member of this subcommittee, although 

he is the chair of Energy and Power Subcommittee, and so he is 

93 

a guest of this subcommittee, and under our rules, the guests go 

last. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Terry, 

and than all the witnesses today as well. 

Dr. DeHaven, I want to ask you a couple of questions. Dr. Bennett has referred repeatedly about the subjectivity of inspections to 

determine soring. Do you agree with him on that issue? Is it subjective or is it objective? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. There is some level of subjectivity because most 

of the inspection is based on a digital palpation where you are 

palpating those areas of the foot that most likely are to be sore. 

However, having said that, and with a lot of experience in the field, 

there has always been good correlation between what the inspector 

is finding on digital palpation and what the technology, 

thermography and radiology, will tell you as well. So while Dr. 

Bennett referred to a lot of this as new technology, in fact, we have 

been using thermography and radiology X-rays for a number of 

years. But from a practical standpoint, when you have hundreds of 

horses that are going through inspection, you can’t use that on 

every animal. So the mainstay of the inspection is digital palpation 

by that inspector, and indeed, good correlation between what the 

inspector is finding and what the technology would corroborate. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, do you believe that the current HIO DQP 

system is working? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. We have heard a lot about the level of compliance. 

I have heard numbers like 96.6 percent and 98.5 percent compliance rate. Two points on that. One would argue after 43 years of 

a goal of zero soring, we really haven’t achieved that we meant to 

years ago. The other is that those compliance rates are based on 

a self-policing program where you have industry inspectors inspecting the industry. What the statistics also show is that those inspectors that work for the industry are about 10 times more likely to 

find a violation when they have a USDA veterinarian looking over 

their shoulder. So those compliance rates assume self-policing. 

When there is oversight, in fact, the compliance rate goes way 

down. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, it is my understanding that APHIS sends 

in inspectors only about 6 percent of the shows, and the violation 

rates are much higher there than they are with the self-policing of 

the DQPs. Is that correct? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. Indeed. If we look at the statistics from 2012 with 

71,000 inspections done by the industry, there was a 99 percent 

compliance rate. However, when they are overseen by a USDA inspector, that compliance rate goes down to about 94 percent. Stated 

another way, 78 percent of the violations that the industry inspectors found during the 2012 show year were found when USDA was 

present, even though they are at less than 10 percent of the shows. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Right, right. Well, I don’t see why people would 

be opposed to this legislation. This legislation simply says we will 

have independent inspectors trained by USDA, hired by the shows, 

and it is not even mandatory that the shows hire those inspectors. 

If they don’t hire those inspectors, then they are going to be subject 

to more penalties. But Mr. Irby, do you object to independent inVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jan 30, 2015 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 113\113-91 CHRIS
94 

spectors trained by the Department of Agriculture and veterinarians on top of that? 

Mr. IRBY. No, absolutely not. I am 100 percent in favor of the 

USDA licensing the inspectors as the bill provides and doing away 

with the self-regulation system because in 40 years we have proven 

that we cannot do it, and I believe that is the only way that a truly 

sound horse will be able to be—— 

Mr. WHITFIELD. And Mr. DeHaven, do you support the legislation 

in that sense? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. Indeed I do. I think it addresses the self-policing 

problem. It also narrowly focuses on the areas where the biggest 

problems are: the use of the pads and chains, which contribute to 

soring. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Yes, and you also said there is no reason to have 

one of these on a horse unless he has been sored. Is that correct? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. It provides an additional incentive to sore a horse. 

If you create an injury on that horse’s pastern by the practice of 

soring and now you are going to have a change strike that, you are 

going to get a much greater reaction than if that animal had not 

been sored. And so by removing the change, you remove much of 

the incentive to even sore that horse to begin with. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Now, Tennessee Walking Horses are showed in 

a lot of places around the country. We have 12 or 13 IHOs, or 

HIOs, and I am sad to say that the problem does seem to be in the 

Shelbyville, Tennessee, area, parts of Kentucky where PRIDE has 

been, and parts of Missouri. Those seem to be the three problem 

areas. Would you agree with that, Mr. Irby? 

Mr. IRBY. Yes, sir, I would. It is a majority in the Southeast but 

those three are the top three areas. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. And what about you, Mr. DeHaven? Would you 

agree with that? 

Dr. DEHAVEN. I would agree, and that is where the concentration 

of the Big Lick horses is. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. And Mr. Bennett, whom I have met with and 

who I enjoy being with and he is a personable fellow and I am sure 

he does a great job, but he has been very much involved with the 

show HIO, and we have the letter from the Department of Agriculture saying that they are notifying them that they are going to 

decertify their program, and we have another letter, unfortunately, 

that applies to the Kentucky HIO PRIDE, and another letter to the 

Missouri. So this program is working—this industry is working 

well without using soring or action devices in many parts of the 

country, but in this one geographical area because of self-policing, 

in my humble opinion, it is not working, and that is why we introduced the legislation. 

Dr. BENNETT. And I would agree with that. 

Mr. TERRY. Your time is expired and now recognize the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Guthrie. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you very much. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Guthrie, would you just 1 minute? 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Yes, I will yield to my friend. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. I just wanted to ask for unanimous consent to 

enter into the record the documents that I gave you all yesterday 

95 

that we refer to certain Web sites, and then also a letter from the 

ASPCA supporting the legislation. 

Mr. TERRY. All those documents were submitted to us and to the 

other side, and there is no objection, so they are entered. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. And also from Mr. Yoho, who is a Member of 

Congress from Florida, his letter about the legislation. 

Mr. TERRY. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Johnson from Tennessee—and I am sorry, I had to step into 

another committee hearing, so you may have answered this. I know 

the one question I was going to ask, you did get to, but you talked 

about the effect of this bill on the industry and Tennessee. I am 

from Kentucky, just north of—I am in Bowling Green, so I am just 

a few miles from the Tennessee border, and I understand Shelbyville and I know that area. You talked about it is going to affect 

the industry in that area, and so my question is, is it bad actors 

or is it widespread? That is one thing that is hard to get out of all 

the information I tried to receive. One group is saying it is just a 

handful of bad actors. There is a handful saying it is widespread. 

Then you see investigations where just a handful of horses are 

found and then you see when the USDA comes, they said 52 out 

of 52 were found. So it is difficult to come up with exactly—what 

is your opinion? Is it bad actors or is it widespread? 

Mr. JOHNSON. What I have testified to here today is the impact 

it would have on Tennessee’s economy, Tennessee rural communities, Tennessee charities that depend on these horse shows for 

their charitable contributions and fundraising for the year. For the 

young people that are involved in these organizations of showing 

horses and so forth, the caring of animals in a proper way, the 

training of the animal in a proper way, it is a great tool for raising 

kids with. It is a great activity for families to build their family 

around. Now, I am not an expert in other areas that deal with 

whether it is the bad apple or whether it is widespread. That is for 

folks with more tools than I have available to me. But I can tell 

you that it will be devastating to eliminate the Big Lick horse, the 

performance horse from being shown, and I think with all due respect, Chairman, Representative Whitfield, that your bill does 

much more than what you have described to this committee, and 

that is my concern. I think it will change the industry around this 

country tremendously, and I don’t have the details to go into that 

but—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE. But if it doesn’t just prevent soring, then my question is, is preventing soring what is going to hurt the Tennessee 

economy or having this method of preventing soring? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Having this method. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. And why is it more—I am just trying to get information, unless you want—I can yield to my friend. Do you want 

to follow up? Because he brought you into it. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, I mean, we are talking about independent 

inspectors here and we are talking about removing action devices 

and preventing soring. Other than that, how is that going to hurt 

your economy so much? 

96 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, the folks that I depend on tell me—and I 

don’t have all the details there and I would be glad to furnish this 

after the fact if I could. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Sure. 

Mr. JOHNSON. But it goes much—your bill goes much further 

than that and would eliminate really the performance horse. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, one organization down there asked me for 

some specific information about this bill. We sent them a letter explaining in detail that it didn’t do what they said, and they refused 

to put it on their Web site even. So I think there is some misinformation, but basically the bill provides independent inspectors, 

veterinarians trained by USDA. It gives the show the option of 

using those inspectors. If they don’t use those inspectors and 

APHIS comes in and finds a violation, then there is pretty severe 

penalties, but it does eliminate soring and it eliminates the action 

devices like this, which Mr. DeHaven and others have said are not 

necessary unless you are soring. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Could I interject? 

Mr. TERRY. Sure. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I agree, I think we need one HIO, OK? The thing 

that concerns me is, is you said that the show managers have an 

option if they don’t want to use the veterinarian inspectors. If everybody in here is for the welfare of the horse, what worries me 

is we start having shows that nobody knows about that no inspectors go to, and those bad actors that we got, if we don’t get rid of 

them, they are going to show up there, and if we are after the welfare of the horse, I think we are creating an issue there that we 

haven’t perceived yet. 

The second thing I would like to see is—I am sorry. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Well, I just wanted to—Mr. Johnson said a balanced approach, and I was leaving just as I think somebody asked 

you that, and you were going to give the balanced approach. So 

how do you stop it then? If this bill is not a way to stop it, then 

what does stop it? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Let me answer that, but let me finish my train of 

thought with Dr. DeHaven and let him interject his opinion, but 

my opinion is, and I am all for one HIO. I am all for licensed veterinarians looking at them. I am all for objective testing, and I am 

for getting rid of soring. But I worry that we will find enough accredited veterinarians that want to go to horse shows on Friday 

night that start at 6:00 and don’t get over with until 2:30 in the 

morning and then go back Saturday night and go through it again. 

Dr. DeHaven can answer that better than I can. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Do you want to respond, Dr. DeHaven? It is a 

preference, anyway. 

Dr. DEHAVEN. I think we will only know the answer to that 

question if and when we are faced with that situation. Clearly, the 

AAEP, who represents several thousand equine practitioners, feels 

that that is feasible and the best solution. I think the worst-case 

scenario that even if we didn’t have veterinarians doing the inspection as is the case now, at least they would be independent inspectors—— 

Mr. WHITFIELD. And trained. 

97 

Dr. DEHAVEN [continuing]. Who are trained and assigned by the 

Department of Agriculture and not an HIO. 

Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, that is why—I mean, I do think it is significant that every veterinary—— 

Mr. TERRY. The gentleman’s time has—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE. I will yield back my time. 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Mr. Whitfield and Mr. Guthrie, and no 

one else here to ask questions, so this will conclude our hearing. 

Now, under our rules, any of the members can submit questions 

to you, and it sounds like there is already—Commissioner Johnson, 

you mentioned that you wanted to supply, please feel free to do 

that. Once you get those questions from us, if there are any questions to you, we request that within about 14 days that you comply 

and get those back to us. I am not sure anyone is going to do that 

but the rules allow that, and I want to let you know that you may 

get those written questions from the committee. 

With that, I want to thank each and every one of you for coming 

here today and offering your expertise before us. It is extremely 

helpful to us to have your insights when we are dealing with pieces 

of legislation. So thank you for being here, and we are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY A. WAXMAN

Today the Subcommittee will consider H.R. 1518, the PAST Act. I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and I strongly support its goal of completely eliminating 

the cruel and inhumane practice of ‘‘soring’’ from horse shows. 

As my colleagues have described, soring refers to a variety of techniques that deliberately cause injury to a horse in order to force the horse to place more pressure 

on its hind legs and pick up its front limbs quickly, creating the kind of exaggerated, unnatural gait that is unfortunately prized by show judges. It is most commonly inflicted upon the Tennessee Walking Horse, a gentle and elegant breed that 

suffers great pain from these techniques. 

In 1970, Congress passed the Horse Protection Act, or HPA, to prohibit the showing, sale, auction, exhibition, or transport of sored horses, and to direct the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to administer the law and conduct inspections. Six 

years later, after too few USDA inspections, a bill amending the legislation to permit non-USDA inspections of horses was enacted. 

In the time since the 1970s, the inadequacy of HPA has become strikingly clear. 

H.R. 1518, introduced by my colleague Mr. Whitfield, with Ms. Schakowsky and others as original cosponsors, would address several of the statute’s flaws. First, H.R. 

1518 would end the current self-inspecting and self-policing system, which has kept 

too many soring offenses in the shadows and even allowed repeat offenders to remain on the circuit for years. It would do this by directing the Secretary of Agriculture to pick the inspectors, thereby avoiding the conflicts of interest that arise 

when those with vested interests select the inspectors. Second, the bill would add 

to the definition of soring the use of so-called ‘‘action devices’’ on horses’ limbs, such 

as chains and certain weighted shoes. Third, the bill would increase violation penalties and mandate permanent disqualification from any horse show, exhibition, sale 

or auction after three cited violations. 

As we will hear from the witnesses today, the majority of horse trainers, show 

organizers, and veterinarians recognize that reforms are needed to ensure that 

walking horse shows are carried out in a fair and humane manner. The problem 

in the walking horse industry is too deepand the self-policing system is too wrought 

with conflicts of interest to be fixed by self-regulation; action by Congress is essential. 

I want to thank Mr. Whitfield for introducing this bill, because it is the right 

thing to do, for both the well-being of show horses and the restoration of a fair and 

sound walking horse industry. I encourage all my colleagues who have not already 

done so to support the bill.Thank you. 

98 


87602.064
99 


87602.065
100 


87602.066
101 


87602.067
102 


87602.068
103 


87602.069
104 


87602.070
105 


87602.071
106 


87602.072
107 


87602.073
108 


87602.074
109 


87602.075
110 


87602.076
111 


87602.077
112 


87602.078
113 


87602.079
114 


87602.080
115 


87602.081
116 


87602.082
117 


87602.083
118 


87602.084
119 


87602.085
120 


87602.086
121 


87602.087
122 


87602.088
123 


87602.089
124 


87602.090
125 


87602.091
126 


87602.092
127 


87602.093
128 


87602.094
129 


87602.095
130 


87602.096
131 


87602.097
132 


87602.098
133 


87602.099
134 


87602.100
135 


87602.101
136 


87602.102
137 


87602.103
138 


87602.104
139 


87602.105
140 


87602.106
141 


87602.107
142 


87602.108
143 


87602.109
144 


87602.110
145 

Æ 


87602.111