Those who have horses, want to ever own horses or know someone READ

Discussion in 'Other Pets & Livestock' started by Varisha, Nov 29, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Varisha

    Varisha Chillin' With My Peeps

    269
    1
    149
    Mar 22, 2007
    I'm posting this from a horse forum I go to. It was recived from the American Quarter Horse Association (a breed of horses registry group).
    It is on a Proposed bill- banning transportation of all horses for any purpose so even taking your horse to the vet for a life and death emegency would be banned. Let alone getting your just bought horse home, going to shows, going to trail rides and so on.

    If you experience difficulty viewing this message please click here http://www.aqha.com/email/ActionAlertSB311.html


    AQHA ACTION ALERT - SENATE BILL 311
    Dear AQHA Member:
    TRANSPORTING ANY HORSE FOR ANY ACTIVITY MAY BE AT RISK!
    Senator Mary Landrieu (D)-Louisiana, has succeeded in scheduling Senate Bill 311 for a floor vote. You may recall this bill reads “To amend the Horse Protection Act to prohibit the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption, and for other purposes.
    Senator Landrieu has offered the following amendment to this bill:
    Section 3 of the Horse Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1822) is amended to add the following:
    `(1) horses and other equines play a vital role in the collective experience of the United States and deserve protection and compassion;
    `(2) horses and other equines are domestic animals that are used primarily for recreation, pleasure, and sport;
    `(3) unlike cows, pigs, and many other animals, horses and other equines are not raised for the purpose of being slaughtered for human consumption;
    `(4) individuals selling horses or other equines at auctions are seldom aware that the animals may be bought for the purpose of being slaughtered for human consumption;
    `(5) the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the Department of Agriculture has found that horses and other equines cannot be safely and humanely transported in double deck trailers;'; and
    (3) by striking paragraph (8) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)) and inserting the following:
    `(8) the movement, showing, exhibition, or sale of sore horses in intrastate commerce, and the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation in intrastate commerce of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption, adversely affect and burden interstate and foreign commerce;'.

    (c) Prohibition- Section 5 of the Horse Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1824) is amended--
    (1) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (11) as paragraphs (9) through (12), respectively; and
    (2) by inserting after paragraph 7 the following:
    `(8) The shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of any horse or other equine to be slaughtered for human consumption.'.

    (d) Authority To Detain- Section 6(e) of the Horse Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1825(e)) is amended--
    (1) by striking the first sentence of paragraph (1);
    (2) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) and as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively; and
    (3) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)) the following:

    `(1) The Secretary may detain for examination, testing, or the taking of evidence--
    `(A) any horse at any horse show, horse exhibition, or horse sale or auction that is sore or that the Secretary has probable cause to believe is sore; and
    `(B) any horse or other equine that the Secretary has probable cause to believe is being shipped, transported, moved, delivered, received, possessed, purchased, sold, or donated in violation of section 5(8).'.


    (e) Authorization of Appropriations- Section 12 of the Horse Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1831) is amended by striking `$500,000' and inserting `$5,000,000'.
    This bill may have far-reaching effects on our members and their ability to buy and sell horses. Members may sell horses unaware of the buyer's intent with the animal and to where it may be transported, possibly resulting in legal ramifications for the seller. This legislation is vague and ambiguous and its passage could have far-reaching consequences. We urge you to contact the senators of your state and voice your opposition to this legislation and the funding to enact it. To contact your senator, telephone (202) 224-3121 and ask to be transferred to your senators' offices. When speaking with your Senators' office, please tell them you are opposed to Senate Bill 311 as written.
    Congress resumes business on Monday, December 3rd. Please do your part and call on Monday!
    AQHA PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE

    You received this e-mail because you requested to receive all e-mail from AQHA. If you would like to change this setting, please login to the Member Services area at aqhamembers.com using your member ID and PIN and choose Change E-mail Address.

    American Quarter Horse Association P.O. Box 200 Amarillo, TX 79168​
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2007
  2. Frozen Feathers

    Frozen Feathers Chillin' With My Peeps

    May 4, 2007
    Maine
    And how do they plan to enforce this?? Doesn't our government have better things to do then worry about who a horse is being sold to or bought for??
     
  3. patandchickens

    patandchickens Flock Mistress

    12,521
    85
    341
    Apr 20, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    Quote:Oh it does NOT.

    One can certainly argue that the bill is poorly written and/or may not be a good idea, and I'm not saying don't contact your congressperson... but it WOULD NOT in any way prevent horses from ever stepping on a trailer. (Please note that "and other purposes" does not mean "all other possible purposes", it just means "a few things in addition to slaughter-for-consumption")

    And you're going to look like a meaningless bonehead if you write to your congressional representatives claiming that it does. Whereas, if you say "look, here are the specific things that are problematic about htis and why" and display some knowledge of what the Act would *really* do, you might get listened to a bit [​IMG]


    Pat
     
  4. Varisha

    Varisha Chillin' With My Peeps

    269
    1
    149
    Mar 22, 2007
    Quote:Oh it does NOT.

    One can certainly argue that the bill is poorly written and/or may not be a good idea, and I'm not saying don't contact your congressperson... but it WOULD NOT in any way prevent horses from ever stepping on a trailer. (Please note that "and other purposes" does not mean "all other possible purposes", it just means "a few things in addition to slaughter-for-consumption")

    And you're going to look like a meaningless bonehead if you write to your congressional representatives claiming that it does. Whereas, if you say "look, here are the specific things that are problematic about htis and why" and display some knowledge of what the Act would *really* do, you might get listened to a bit [​IMG]


    Pat

    I did not think calling names was a part of this forum! *shame* :|

    As it is worded if you sell it to someone and don't know they are taking it to slaughter you can be in deep trouble. If they even suspect that is going to happen you could end up in trouble.

    with statement "all other possible" it is clear as mud and can be interpruted to many anything.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2007
  5. patandchickens

    patandchickens Flock Mistress

    12,521
    85
    341
    Apr 20, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    I did not think calling names was a part of this forum! *shame* :|

    OH, I apologize Varisha, I was not in any way calling you a meaningless bonehead ;P Sorry!!!!!! I was just saying that that's how anyone would LOOK to a congressional representative if they go sending off letters claiming off-the-wall things. Representatives are not going to listen to people complaining about things that aren't so... they WILL (well ok may [​IMG]) listen to informed complaints.

    As it is worded if you sell it to someone and don't know they are taking it to slaughter you can be in deep trouble. .

    This is technically true. And THAT is a good thing to write your congressman (or -woman) about! But that is not in any way preventing you from trailering your own horses around...!

    with statement "all other possible" it is clear as mud and can be interpruted to many anything.

    That is not actually true. "All other possible" DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE ACT!! What the act says, that I think you're referring to, is "and for other purposes". There is a specific way that the legal language of bills etc works, and this is in fact the way it's done when referring to one main thing plus a few specific other cases.

    Read the actual act and the HOrse Protection Act (or whatever it's called, I forget exactly) that it is amending. "Other purposes" basically boils down to "sore" horses. THis DOES NOT MEAN any horse experiencing any physical discomfort. It refers to the definition of 'sore' used in the original Horse Protection Act (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001821----000-.html)


    (3) The term “sore” when used to describe a horse means that—
    (A) an irritating or blistering agent has been applied, internally or externally, by a person to any limb of a horse,
    (B) any burn, cut, or laceration has been inflicted by a person on any limb of a horse,
    (C) any tack, nail, screw, or chemical agent has been injected by a person into or used by a person on any limb of a horse, or
    (D) any other substance or device has been used by a person on any limb of a horse or a person has engaged in a practice involving a horse

    For instance 'sored' gaited horses. THAT is what's being prohibited...and it's just an extension of the existing laws prohibiting soring.

    Show me EXACTLY WHERE you are prohibited from taking your horse to the vet or for a trail ride or just for a trailer ride around the block.


    Pat​
     
  6. patandchickens

    patandchickens Flock Mistress

    12,521
    85
    341
    Apr 20, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    btw, for peoples' convenience, here is the full text of the proposed amendment

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-311

    and here is the full text of the thing it is amending:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001821----000-.html
    (note that it is multi-page, requiring use of the 'next' button at bottom)


    Pat, who thinks it needs to be reworded to avoid putting sellers at risk for what buyers may do with horses, and who does not think that banning slaughter (which is what banning transportation to slaughter effectively does) is necessarily in horses' best interest, but who also strongly believes in not believing what other people claim things say without having read the source herself [​IMG]
     
  7. Varisha

    Varisha Chillin' With My Peeps

    269
    1
    149
    Mar 22, 2007
    Ok I got permision from one of the members of the horse forum i'm on to post her response because it does a much better wording of some of the big gapping wholes in this proposed change. Plus she made some good points that I think should be read.

    YES part of this bill is about transporting horses for slaughter, BUT it also ammends part of the bill specifically for the general public hauling horses to and from shows and events.

    So if you haul your horse to a show or trail ride and get there and someone else's horse Kicks yours and makes it lame, YOU could have your horse confiscated if you haul that horse away from the event. Or if you haul your horse and another horse in the trailer kicks it before you get to the event.

    This bill does not define sore AND the original bill it is ment to amend also Does NOT define sore very well.
    Part B is also Quite SPECIFIC. It means I can't transport my horse to the VET? I've already had one case where a horse stepped on a nail during a trail ride and I had to haul my horse 45 miles to the vet from the ride. Does that make me a law breaker if this bill passes? (YES) What about the horses in the Endurance rides who slip or twist a fetlock or something? By this bill you can't haul them home.

    Seriously this is BAD BAD BAD for anyone who has a horse.

    Just check this out!! PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE!!! ( yes i'm shouting cause this affects me specifically since the closest vet to me is a 30 mile drive and none make house calls)

    INTRASTATE means within your state. SO you CANNOT MOVE your lame horse to the vet with this bill!!!!! YOU CANNOT transport A sore horse to DONATE it to a RESCUE!!!! YOu cannot BUY/RESCUE a lame horse and transport it to your house or to the vet to be examined!​
     
  8. Varisha

    Varisha Chillin' With My Peeps

    269
    1
    149
    Mar 22, 2007
    this is directly from the first link you posted on the proposed admendment.

    A BILL
    To amend the Horse Protection Act to prohibit the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption, and for other purposes.
     
  9. speckledhen

    speckledhen Intentional Solitude Premium Member

    If you read the plain English meaning, the phrase "and for other purposes" is extremely open to interpretation and misuse. What other purposes? MUST be defined! If the language is not tweaked into something a bit more specific in this area, it actually could be taken to mean what Varisha has said. Seems to me to be very poorly written and too open in that part of the phrasing. So, let's direct our disdain toward the bonehead that wrote it that way or would vote that into law with such vague wording.
     
  10. Varisha

    Varisha Chillin' With My Peeps

    269
    1
    149
    Mar 22, 2007
    Guess what I learned about the law that got passed to keep them from using double decker trailers to transport horses in only is valid if the horses are headed to slaughter. For any other destination (auctions for example) it is still legal because of the wording. That was on where it should have been that only in dire emergency could horses be transported in those types of trailers because of how some of them are designed.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

BackYard Chickens is proudly sponsored by