A Review of Methods for Detecting Soreness in Horses (2021) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Introduction
1 Introduction
Pages 12-20
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 12... ...
1 Introduction THE TENNESSEE WALKING HORSE The Tennessee walking horse (TWH) , also referred to as Tennessee walker, is a breed of horse that originated in Tennessee more than 100 years ago through a selective breeding process that initially com‐ bined the traits of the Narragansett Pacer and Canadian Pacer to produce a horse that could navigate rough terrains with ease (Menard et al., 2010)
|
From page 13... ...
Introduction There are trainers of TWHs who believe that the big lick can be achieved with hard work, training, and patience (DeHaven, 1999) ,2 but in the early 1950s some TWH owners and trainers began to employ methods, referred to as "soring,"3 to produce the accentuated gait in less time (Mizell and Robboy, 1980; APHIS, 2012a)
|
From page 14... ...
A Review of Methods for Detecting Soreness in Horses illegal to exhibit, transport, sell, or auction horses that are known to be sore5 and authorizes the inspection of horses by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) per‐ sonnel. However, with its funding from Congress limited to about $500,000/year, the ability of APHIS to enforce the HPA nationally was limited (DeHaven, 1999)
|
From page 15... ...
Introduction BOX 1‐1 Continued Requires USDA to license, train, assign, and oversee inspectors enforcing the HPA. Makes the actual act of soring or directing another person to cause a horse to become sore illegal. Prohibits the use of action devices on any limb of Tennessee walking horses, spotted saddle horses, or racking horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, or auctions. Also bans weighted shoes, pads, wedges, hoof bands, or other devices that are not strictly protective or therapeutic in nature. Increases civil and criminal penalties for violation. Allows for permanent disqualification for violators on their third or higher violation (AVMA, 2013)
|
From page 16... ...
A Review of Methods for Detecting Soreness in Horses industry; see Chapter 2 for DQP qualifications) who has authority from an HIO6 to determine if horses are sore or to inspect horses or check records for the enforcement of the HPA. DQPs are licensed through DQP programs administered by HIOs after these organizations have obtained USDA certification (see Chapter 2 for more information on USDA certification requirements)
|
From page 17... ...
Introduction BOX 1‐2 9 C.F.R. § 11.3 Scar Rule The scar rule applies to all horses born on or after October 1, 1975. Horses subject to this rule that do not meet the following scar rule criteria shall be considered to be "sore" and are subject to all prohibitions of section 5 of the Act. The scar rule criteria are as follows: (a) The anterior and anterior‐lateral surfaces of the fore pasterns (extensor surface)
|
From page 18... ...
A Review of Methods for Detecting Soreness in Horses BOX 1‐3 Statement of Task The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will convene an ad hoc committee of equine veterinarians and experts with relevant experience and appropriate professional certifications or academic de‐ grees to review the scientific and veterinary medical literature on hoof and pastern pain and skin/tissue changes on the pastern of horses and evaluate methods used to identify soreness in horses (as defined in the Horse Protection Acta and the implementing regulations) for their scientific validity and reliability. In the course of its study the committee will: examine what is known about the quality and consistency of available methods to identify soreness in horses identify potential new and emerging methods, approaches, and technologies for detecting hoof and pas‐ tern pain and its causes identify research and technology needs to improve the reliability of methods to detect soreness. In a consensus report the committee will describe its conclusions about the validity and reliability of meth‐ ods and provide recommendations to improve the efficacy and consistency of approaches to identifying sore‐ ness. The report will also review the Horse Protection Act regulations, including the "scar rule" found at 9. C.F.R. §11.3 and identify changes that would be necessary to implement the findings of the study. a Sore when used to describe a horse means: (1)
|
From page 19... ...
Introduction Information from the Study Sponsors APHIS provided the committee with video recordings of inspections being performed by VMOs and DQPs at horse shows. An HIO also provided the committee with video recordings of inspections being performed by DQPs. As with other materials received from the public, copies of these videos and docu‐ ments have been deposited in the study's public access file. Materials Used in the Review of the Scar Rule Because there are no published studies on TWH tissue biopsies, the committee's review of the scar rule was conducted using an unpublished paper by Stromberg (2017) in which the author evaluated 136 pastern biopsies from 68 TWHs that were disqualified for violations of the scar rule. This paper was pro‐ vided to the committee by the representative of the Tennessee walking horse industry for its considera‐ tion during the review of the scar rule. The two pathologists8 involved in the evaluation of the pastern biopsies provided 24 pairs out of the 68 pairs for additional review by Dr. Pamela E. Ginn, a member of the study committee and a board‐certified veterinary pathologist and a specialist in veterinary dermato‐ pathology. ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT This report contains four chapters. Chapter 1, this chapter, introduces the study, provides the gen‐ eral background for the study and statement of task for the committee, and explains how the committee addressed its task. Each of the next three chapters addresses a particular item in the statement of task. Chapter 2 focuses on the currently available methods to detect soreness in horses, some of which are currently employed by APHIS to determine if horses are compliant with the HPA. The chapter includes discussions of these methods, how well they detect soreness, and their reliability. In Chapter 3 the com‐ mittee addresses its task of identifying potential new and emerging methods, approaches, and technolo‐ gies for detecting hoof and pastern pain and its causes. The chapter includes a discussion of pain and factors that affect pain perception and the expression of pain as well as a review of pain detection meth‐ ods and technologies based on horse behavior and physiological parameters and a discussion of their potential use in improving the detection of soreness in horses during inspections for compliance with the HPA. Chapter 4 reviews the scar rule, its limitations, and what changes are currently documented regard‐ ing the skin of horses that are suspected of being sore. The basics of dermatologic (skin)
|
From page 20... ...
A Review of Methods for Detecting Soreness in Horses APHIS. 2012b. Horse Protection Act; requiring horse industry organizations to assess and enforce minimum penalties for violations. Fed. Reg. 77: 33607‐33619. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/06/07/2012‐ 13759/horse‐protection‐act‐requiring‐horse‐industry‐organizations‐to‐assess‐and‐enforce‐minimum‐penal‐ ties (accessed October 16, 2019) . APHIS. 2016a. Horse Protection Act and its administration. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwel fare/hpa/ct_hpa_history_and_administration (accessed Feb 13, 2020)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.