Transcript Slide 1

FOSH 2010
Midge Leitch, VMD
Chair
AAEP Welfare Committee
TWH 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 postcompetition 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