FOSH 2010

Midge Leitch, VMDChair

AAEP Welfare CommitteeTWH White Paper Task Force

AAEP Tennessee Walking Horse Task Force – 2007 - 2008

• TWH Taskforce appointed in December, 07• White Paper published in July, 2008• Addresses ‘soring’ in the TWH and makes

recommendations to the TWH Industry which could improve compliance with the Horse Protection Act of 1979

• Presentation of Addendum addressing Pressure Shoeing in March, 2009

• Continued active involvement in the Industry by AAEP members committed to ending ‘soring’

White Paper Recommendations• Implementation of current diagnostic

modalities:– Digital Radiography– Thermography

• Augmentation of physical examination to include:– Removing shoes to detect pressure

shoeing• Attention to and elimination of

conflicts of interest among inspectors

AAEP PROTOCOL FOR THE DETECTION OF PRESSURE SHOEING

• The pressure shoeing protocol is primarily an amplification of the recommendations already made in the White Paper

• Pre-competition Examination• Post-competition Examination

Pre-competition Examination

• Thermographic Screening – Determine areas requiring additional

examination and/or swabbing to detect forbidden substances

• Palpation of the limbs including:– Routine evaluation – Assessment of digital pulses– Critical assessment of specific areas

suggested to be abnormal by thermography

Pre-competition Examination• Inspection of the hooves and shoes

– Hoof tester examination • Includes pressure applied across the heels• Exam may be compromised by the width of

the branches of the shoes (flat shod horses) and/or presence of the package (padded horses)

– Detect and eliminate use of any devices used to tighten the bands which secure the packages

Pre-competition Examination• Digital Radiography

– Lateral images of those horses considered suspicious for pressure shoeing or laminitis

– Detect the presence of acrylic extensions of the hoof capsule or sole surface

• Examination of the horses in a standard pattern at a walk and extended walk, on a loose rein, in hand and under tack

Pre-competition Examination• Positive findings, consistent with the

intent to manipulate a horse’s performance with painful methods, should result in the initiation of the post-competition examination protocol and subsequent imposition of penalties appropriate to the infractions discovered.

Pre-competition and Competition Observations• Continued observation by qualified

veterinarians of the competing horses during both their warm up and while in the ring is essential.– During the warm up, horses should be confined

to a specific warm up area which is under observation by stewards and/or veterinarians who are empowered to prevent any further manipulation of the horses’ shoes or bands or the application of irritant substances or forbidden medications

Post-competition Examination• Horses selected for post-competition

examination must be held in the make-up ring as they leave the show ring until these examinations are completed.

Post-competition Examination

• Thermographic Re-examination• Digital Radiographs of the feet of

randomly selected horses not xrayed prior to the class for detection of:– Pressure shoeing– Acrylic extensions of the hoof capsule or

sole surface– Laminitis – acute or chronic

• Rotation of the third phalanx (coffin bone)• Sinking of the bony column within the hoof

capsule

– Sole thickness

Post-competition Examination

• Removal of both front shoes of randomly selected horses or horses with abnormal physical findings, thermographic patterns and/or digital radiographic findings

Post-competition Examination

• Visual and hoof tester examination of unshod feet for evidence of methods directed at inducing pain– Pressure devices – Excessive paring of the sole or frog– Evidence of chronic bruising (acute or

chronic hemorrhage) on the sole surface

• Weighing of the shoes and shoes + packages

Conclusions

• These evaluations can be conducted in a timely manner if adequate numbers of trained personnel are available and cooperation of exhibitors is mandated. Failure to submit to these testing methods may be considered evidence of non-compliance with the HPA and subsequent disqualification from competition and the application of appropriate penalties should be considered.

White Paper Results - 2009

• First trainer given lifetime suspension for multiple violations of the Horse Protection Act including soring, use of painful device to distract horse during examination, presentation of ‘ringer’ horse for inspection

• Second trainer given 1 year suspension for violation of the HPA

White Paper Results - 2010

• Thermography continues as screening tool

• Additional efforts by individual AAEP members to assist in the implementation of the White Paper recommendations and regulations of the Horse Protection Act

Audit of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Administration of the Horse Protection Program (9/20/2010)• Abolish the current DQP system and

establish by regulation an inspection process based on independent accredited veterinarians, and obtain the authority, if needed, to charge show managers the cost of providing independent, accredited veterinarians to perform inspections at sanctioned horse shows, sales, and other horse-related events.

Audit of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Administration of the Horse Protection Program (9/20/2010)• Implement a control to ensure that

individuals suspended from horse shows, sales, or exhibitions due to Horse Protection Act violations do not participate in subsequent events.

Audit of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Administration of the Horse Protection Program (9/20/2010)• Seek the necessary funding from

Congress to adequately oversee the Horse Protection Program.

• Revise and enforce regulations to prohibit horses disqualified as sore from competing in all classes at a horse show, exhibition, or other horse-related event.

Thank You