A U.S. District judge ruled the U.S. Department of Agriculture exceeded its authority in its final rule to amend the Horse Protection Act.
Four of the five provisions contested in the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration Association’s lawsuit against the USDA were granted summary judgments by Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
The four provisions are the prohibition of action devices and pads, the prohibition of substances, the dermatologic conditions indicative of soring (DCIS) — which replaces the scar rule — and the pre- and post-deprivation review of inspector decisions. The court upholds the HPA’s designated qualified persons (DQP) program.
Action Devices & Pads
Many of the proposed rule changes are similar to those proposed in the 2017 APHIS rule and the Prevent All Soring Tactics (PAST) Act that both houses of Congress have put forth over the past several years. The rule prohibits “any device, method, practice, or substance applied to any horse that could hide or mask evidence of soring, as well as all action devices and non-therapeutic pads and wedges, and substances applied about the hoof.”
While the current regulation prohibits pads or other devices on yearling horses that elevate or change the angle more than 1 inch at the heel, the new rule eliminates all pads unless applied for therapeutic purposes.
“Altering the angulation of a horse’s feet and legs can cause painful lameness, soreness, and inflammation by transferring concussive impact and weight-bearing pressures to joints and other parts of the horse not normally subjected to these forces,” the rule states. “Elevating the foot using stacked hoof pads, or ‘performance packages,’ can also cause an increase in tension in the tendons leading to inflammation, as can extra weight on the horse’s foot.”
Citing a 1982 Auburn University study, the rule also makes the case that raising heels with only pads results in swollen flexor tendons and inflammation. The packages limit the ability to detect pressure soring since the solar surface of the foot is covered. Pressure soring involves the use of items such as bolts, screws, hoof packing and other materials to create force on the sole to influence the horse’s gait.
Action devices are defined as “any boot, collar, chain, roller, beads, bangles, or other devices, which encircles or is placed upon the lower extremity of the leg or slide up and down the leg so as to cause friction, or which can strike the hoof, coronet band or fetlock joint.”
The rule also prohibits all artificial toe-length extensions unless it has been prescribed and receiving therapeutic treatment.
“Toe extensions can be used to sore horses by increasing stress on certain tendons and ligaments,” the rule states.
In his ruling, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk notes the USDA doesn’t dispute that action devices and pads do not cause soring when used appropriately. Two studies by Auburn University and the National Academy of Sciences that the USDA cites in the lawsuit confirm the findings.
“The current Horse Protection Amendments align with these findings, already prohibiting action devices weighing more than [6] ounces each and pads that elevate or change the angle of a horse’s hoof by more than [1] inch,” Kacsmaryk writes. “These current restrictions, when properly adhered to, ensure that no soring is caused by action devices or pads. Banning all action devices and pads only punishes owners and trainers already in compliance with existing regulations and fails to alter the behavior of incorrigible offenders.”
It’s unclear whether the USDA under the Trump administration will appeal the court’s ruling.