Mr. MAGNUSON, from the Committee on Commerce, REPORT [To accompany S. 2543] The Committee on Commerce, to which was referred the bill (S. 2543) to protect interstate and foreign commerce by prohibiting the movement in such commerce of horses which are "sored," and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill do pass. PURPOSE S. 2543, the Horse Protection Act of 1969, is designed to end the inhumane practice of deliberately making sore the feet of Tennessee walking horses in order to alter their natural gait. It would do so by prohibiting the shipment of any horse in commerce, for showing or exhibition, which a person has reason to believe is sored; by making unlawful the exhibiting of a sored horse in any horse show or exhibition in which that horse or any other horse was moved in commerce; and by prohibiting the holding of any horse show in which a sored horse is exhibited if any of the horses in that show were moved in commerce. NEED The Tennessee walking horse is a magnificent animal, distinguished by its proud, high skipping gait or "walk." As a class Tennessee walkers have become exceedingly popular and now number approximately 25,000. The horse's distinctive "walk" may be achieved through patient, careful training and is the result of both the trainers' skill and the horse's natural breeding. Unfortunately, however, it was discovered about 20 years ago that the "walk" could also be created artifically. If the front feet of the horse were deliberately made sore, the intense pain which the animal suffered when placing his forefeet on the ground would cause him to lift them up quickly and thrust them forward, reproducing exactly the desired gait. This soring is usually done by applying a blistering agent, such as oil of mustard, to the pastern area of the horse's leg and by wrapping this area with chains or metal rollers. Then, during a show, the sore is covered by a boot, used ostensibly to protect the horse's foreleg, but now valued because it rubs against the sore and heightens the pain even further. The soring may also be accomplished in several other ways-nails, wedges, or even injections are sometimes used-but the effect is still the same. The "walk," with its handsome stride-or "big lick" as it is known among walking horse enthusiasts-is achieved cheaply, without the long and difficult training period. It can make a mediocre horse perform like a champion. That this method or producing the "big lick" is a particularly cruel and inhumane practice does not appear to matter to walking horse owners and trainers. With increasing frequency they have "sored" horses in order to achieve the desired gait and win the blue ribbon. The result has been that many of these animals have been cruelly mistreated, and persons who refuse to sore their horses have been faced with a difficult dilemma: either they must forgo most opportunities to compete successfully in horse shows, or they must devote their attentions to a different breed of horse. Moreover, the practice of soring, besides inflicting great pain on the individual horse, may seriously harm the breed itself. Because Tennessee walking horse champions are particularly valuable as studs, if a champion was created by means of soring, that practice may actually weaken, over a period of time, the breed's natural ability to "walk" in its distinctive fashion. This bill should help end the unnecessary and inhumane practice of soring horses-something the Tennessee walking horse exhibitors have not done by themselves. By making unlawful the showing or exhibition of sored horses and imposing significant penalties for violations, the bill, in its practical effect, will make it impossible for persons to show sored horses in nearly all horse shows. This denial of the opportunity to win ribbons should destroy the incentive which presently exists for owners and trainers to painfully mistreat these magnificant animals. PROVISIONS There follows a section-by-section summary of the provisions of S. 2543, and a discussion of the committee's interpretation of these various provisions where appropriate. Section 1.-Section 1 of the bill contains its short title: the Horse Protection Act of 1969. Section 2.-Section 2 of the bill defines the term "commerce" and describes what is meant by the term "soring." It states that a horse shall be considered to be sored if, for the purpose of affecting its gait, a blistering agent is applied internally or externally to any of the legs, ankles, feet or other parts of the horse; burns, cuts, or lacerations have been inflicted on the horse; a chemical agent or tacks, nails, or wedges have been used on the horse; or any other method or device has been S. Rept. 91-609 used on the horse, including, but not limited to, chains or boots; which may reasonably be expected either to result in physical pain to the horse when walking, trotting, or otherwise moving; to cause extreme fear or distress to the horse; or to cause inflammation. The committee would point out that not only must one of these soring techniques produce physical pain to the horse, cause extreme fear or distress to the animal, or cause inflammation, but it must also be used for the purpose of affecting its gait. In addition, the committee would emphasize that the secretary is to exercise his discretion in interpreting this definition so as not to apply it to beneficial therapeutic treatment by a veterinarian which is designed to relieve pain or lameness or to restore a lame or disabled horse's normal gait. Section 3.-Section 3 of the bill contains the congressional finding that the soring of horses for the purpose of affecting their natural gait is a cruel and inhumane practice, that the movement of sored horses in commerce adversely affects and burdens such commerce, and that horses which are sored compete unfairly with horses that are moved in commerce which are not sored. Section 4.-Section 4 sets forth some of the violations of the bill. It makes it unlawful for any person to ship, transport or otherwise move, or to deliver or receive for movement, in commerce, for the purpose of showing or exhibition, any horse which such person has reason to believe is sored. It also makes unlawful the showing or exhibiting of a sored horse in any horse show or exhibition in which that horse or any other horse was moved to such show or exhibition in commerce. Finally it makes it unlawful for any person to conduct a horse show or exhibition in which there is shown or exhibited a horse which is sored, if any horse was moved to such show or exhibition in commerce, unless such person can establish that he took all reasonable precautions to prevent the showing or exhibiting of the sored horse. It will be noted that violations are centered upon the horse show rather than on the individual horse which is shipped interstate. The reason for this policy is twofold. It will allow the Department of Agriculture to administer the law without unreasonable burden, and it focuses upon the principal institution-the show or exhibitionwhich serves to perpetuate the practice of soring. Thus the bill places responsibility on the persons conducting a horse show, as well as on those who participate in it, to make sure that there is compliance with the law. However since it would be unfair to impose liability upon an individual who is conducting a horse show in which a sored horse happens to be exhibited after he has made a conscientious and concerted effort to see that this does not occur the bill provides that such a person may escape liability once he establishes that he took all reasonable precautions to prevent the showing or exhibiting of the sored horse. The Committee intends that the term "reasonable precautions" will be construed to include at the minimum the examination of each horse to be exhibited by one or more qualified and independent veterinarians as the horses enter the exhibition area or shortly before they are actually exhibited. Section 5.-In order to facilitate the effective enforcement of the bill subsection 5(a) would authorize any representative of the Secretary of Agriculture to inspect horses which are being moved or have S. Rept. 91-609 |