Training of both DQPs and VMOs should be conducted in joint sessions, thus aiding in the partnership by standardizing inspections, utilizing consistent terminology between DQPs, HIOs, and VMOs, and increasing communication between the DQPs and VMOs which may lessen tension and build rapport. Mentoring of a "new" DQP with an experienced VMO will also assist in developing the partnership. Training should include more "hands-on training," with VMOs and DQPs sequentially examining the same horse. Greater availability of visual aids such as video- tapes and slide sets would be beneficial for the participants. Topics of training should include current techniques in soring or pressure shoeing horses, use of digital pulse/pressure during inspections, along with development of interpersonal skills and issue resolution. Training and/or education venues should be further developed to target youth, exhibitors/trainers/owners, veterinary community, farriers, and show management with the goals of changing consciousness, elevating respect for the DQPs and VMOs, and increasing compliance. Judges must be educated on their appropriate role of the "bad image" horse and compliance of the HPA. Appropriate and timely dissemination of violators' lists must be implemented.

Data generated through research was generally agreed upon to enhance compliance of the HPA. Topics of research with high priority included utilization of modalities (thermography, fluoroscope, digital pressure/pulse, ultrasound) to develop objective methods for detection of soring and pressure shoeing. Additional research topics included screening methods for chemical analysis in urine, blood or hair, or the effects of action devices, shoes, and pads. University faculties were considered the most credible source to perform the research, although collaboration among other disciplines is synergetic to the design, data collection and application of the results. Funding contributions for research should be sought from USDA, HIOs, animal protection groups, and allied industry.

Several basic concepts were brought forth concerning the success of the partnership and to enhance compliance with the HPA. One concept is that the HIO's need to accept that "soring" is a problem within their industry and several changes need to be implemented to foster a working partnership. A change in attitude is necessary to make the "sored" horse socially unacceptable, and judges must be accountable and supported for severely discounting the "sored"horse during competitions. Exhibitors/owners/trainers need an alternative "winning" image, and the judges and HIOs must be responsible for this proposal. The respect of the DQPs in the HIOs needs to be elevated, and this can be accomplished through more stringent screening of the credentials of new applicants and performance of existing DQPs, more focused, standardized training, stronger rapport with horse show management, USDA and exhibitors, and increased circulation of violators' lists. An objective technology, even with some deficiencies, should be embraced by the HIOs and USDA to detect soring. Finally, the initiation of broad-based education, especially of youth, may be instrumental in changing the attitude and benefitting the horse's welfare both in and out of the show ring.

Qualifications of a DQP were addressed since this appears to be an area of past conflict and was a high priority of both groups. The discussion concerning the qualifications of the DQP included physical capability, people skills required in communication and maintaining a professional attitude, and horse handling experience. The possibility of a standard registration form across all HIOs for DQP application was suggested. Honesty and integrity were discussed as essential, but, one group suggested that DQPs should have no violations of the Horse Protection Act (HPA) or tickets pertaining to other HIO regulations, while the other group suggested some minor violations were acceptable for a DQP. Each group mentioned as high priority conflict of interest as a potential source of problems for DQPs, especially farriers and veterinarians.

Other ideas included that show management should have a working knowledge of the HPA and the role of the DQPs in compliance. Training of the industry by APHIS on record keeping may also be beneficial.

A high priority was education of the HPA within the horse industry. This would include judges, especially concerning the "bad image" horse, trainers, owners and youth (such as 4-H). Methods of education included publicizing the violators/hearing list with names, violation, and suspension time. There was disparity in opinions whether this listing should be available upon request or published monthly in an HIO magazine. In the past, violators' lists were not shared among HIOs; thus the suggestion that USDA develop and maintain a database on violators and violators would be honored between HIOs. Other educational methods include public seminars open to the public and as continuing educational units for DQPs, or written articles on HPA in annual horse publications (high priority) not only of the HIOs but include other breeds which will increase awareness of the impact of the HPA. Another method included education prior to qualifying for amateur/professional/exhibitors card. Increased visibility at the show consisting of posters, informational booths possibly staffed by VMO, DQP or animal protection organization representative, or other informational brochures were considered favorable by some participants, but others voiced the opinion that they are at the show "to be entertained, not educated."

Education external to the HIOs could target youth in a general media campaign fashioned after the "no smoking" "or "anti-drug" campaign (high to medium priority) with the goal of "changing consciousness." Cooperative Extension, animal protection organizations, and HIOs could cooperatively develop materials targeted for youth. This may have an effect on their future compliance with the HPA along with a persuasive effect on their parents.

Low priority was placed on who should pay for education, but ideas included Cooperative Extension, animal protection organizations, HIOs, and USDA.

Research Topics and Issues

The validity of research enhancing compliance of the HPA was an issue of disagreement with Group 1 rating research a high priority and Group 2 rating it low. Group 2 was suspicious of research and rated integrity and education a higher priority.

The topics of possible research were addressed in each group, with Group 1 pursuing a more extensive discussion. The topics of high priority research included utilization of a digital pulse (easy to do, no stress to horse, cheap, exhibitors could utilize prior to a class, Group 1 only), and use of a fluoroscope (Group 2 only) for detection of noncompliance. Both groups rated the comparisons of modalities (e.g., ultrasound, nuclear scintigraphy, thermography, radiographs, etc.) for detection of soring as high to medium priority, recognizing the need to identify an objective and/or quantifiable standard and to assess false positive/false negative incidences. Group 1 rated the surveying of shoeing to assess the effects of various pads and shoes as medium priority. Topics of low priority included stress physiology, utilization of thermography, and force plate testing (Groups 1 and 2).

The question of who should fund research included answers of USDA, allied industry, voluntary contributions, animal protection organizations, and matching funds between HIO and USDA.

University researchers in veterinarian schools rated high to the question of who should conduct such research (credibility), while private research firms rated low priority. Private veterinarians and VMOs were suggested to collect data only, but not compile and analyze the results.

Areas of Consensus of Both Groups:

Training: The areas of consensus consisted of joint training sessions, mentoring of new DQPs with VMOs, qualification of DQPs needs to be addressed especially in the area of conflict of interest, additional education within the horse industry which included compiling a database by USDA of violators, written articles in HIOs publication, and a general media campaign aimed at youth.

Research: Both groups considered the research topic of comparison of modalities as medium priority. Low priority topics with consensus in each group was force plate testing and thermography. University veterinarian schools were rated high as capable of performing the research, while private research firms were consistently rated low.

Areas of Disagreement Between Groups:

Training: Both groups agreed integrity was important qualifications of a DQP, but there was disagreement whether the DQPs should have previous violations or tickets. One group said none, while the other group said only minor violations. Publicizing the violators' list was suggested in both groups, but disparity in opinions were heard on whether this listing should be available upon request or published monthly in HIO magazines.

Research: The validity of research enhancing compliance of HPA was in disagreement between groups.

Impact of Specific Comments on Strategic Plan/Horse Protection Program:

Joint training and standardization of training was the focus point of both discussions. Greater awareness of conflict of interests needs attention. Youth education should be addressed in plan along with general education for the HIOs membership.

Research may or may not have potential impact on compliance of HPA. The participants were showing some interest in fluoroscope, but not thermography technology, for the detection of sore or pressure shod horses. Force plate technology also did not receive support. Applied research rather than basic appeared to be more acceptable, but some were suspicious of the benefits of research.

Recommendations-Alternatives:

Recommendation that USDA compile data on violators in a data bank, with results available to all HIOs. Additional education to youth and other breeds was recommended.

The highest priority issue was the joint training of VMOs and DQPs by regions twice yearly. This should strengthen the partnership concept, build rapport, be cost effective, and promote better communication between the participants. Standardized inspections should be utilized among all HIOs. Topics which should be addressed in training included a comprehensive horse health overview, hands-on-training, and utilization of similar terms and examination techniques such that all inspectors are standardized. New concepts of issue resolutions and development of interpersonal skills should be incorporated into training. Training should include training sessions, briefings, and written publications such as newsletters. Who should "do" the training included VMOs, HIOs and humane organizations. The HIOs may contribute information on current methodologies and techniques utilized in the soring of horses. The costs of training should be shared by APHIS, HIOs, humane groups, and possibly government grants.

There was concern on how to obtain enough qualified DQPs to cover the large number of shows, especially on the current wage scale. Qualifications of a DQP were addressed since this appears to be an area of past conflict. The DQPs qualifications should include that the individual is physically capable, have knowledge of horses especially anatomy and biomechanics of gaits, have no previous HPA violations, and minimize the conflict of interest problems. One suggestion was to have DQPs have no affiliation with the facet of the horse industry they are inspecting.

Other suggestions from the Group included that the future role of the VMO could be used in unaffiliated shows. Education about the HPA could be provided by HIOs for owners, breeders, exhibitors, youth, and show management. Another role for APHIS may be to invite show management to training. Thus, use it as an incentive to increase profits at shows, and with increased compliance there would be fewer federal guidelines in the future.

Research

The Group agreed that research would enhance compliance of the Act. The highest priority topic of research was "How to detect a sored horse." This may include a comprehensive examination including its behavior, digital pulse evaluation, and uses of different technological modalities (fluoroscope, thermography, ultrasound, etc.) to evaluate objective methods of evaluation. Field research using stress physiology was suggested. There were opposing views on performing research on the effect of age and/or training methods.

The most credible source of researchers to conduct studies were Universities (carefully selected to avoid bias) and private equine veterinarians who may be best suited to identify researchable problems. There was disagreement if research proposals should be solicited and undergo a competitive grant process before awarding funding or if specific researchers should be identified for topics. Performing the same research at two universities was mentioned as improving the objectivity and quality of the results, but may be prohibitively expensive. Everyone agreed the research should be of such quality to be scrutinized by the peer review process necessary for publication in scientific journals, which may also provide some assurance of objectivity.

The funding of the research should be an equal contribution of funds from industry, humane groups, and government.

Impact of Specific Comments on Strategic Plan/Horse Protection Program

Joint training and standardization of training was the high priority point of the discussion.

Research examining objective methods of detecting soring was rated high in priority of topics to fund.

Recommendations-Alternatives

Recommendation that USDA educate show management and use this as a tool to increase profits for the show.

Training topics included a discussion on the appropriate recipients of training. It was the consensus of the Group with high priority that formalized training should start with DQPs and VMO's. Secondly, veterinarians and farriers associated with the industry and shows should also receive training. The exhibitors/owners/trainers, horse show management, and horse show judges (require for licensing) should receive training but with a lesser focus. Training was further defined to include general education for the veterinary community (all breeds and disciplines), humane or animal protection organizations, advocates/lobbyists, and youth.

Priority of training methods included joint training of VMOs and DQPs which received the highest rating, followed by mentoring programs, and uniformity across all HIO's. The amount of time required to train a DQP or the "refresher" course for DQPs should be increased with the inclusion of "hands-on" experiences. Joint training and "hands-on" exercises will assist in standardizing the VMOs, HIOs and DQPs.

Topics which should be included in training sessions encompassed the use of the digital pulse as a tool to detect pressure shoeing and soring (highest priority) and a description of the current techniques utilized in soring and pressure shoeing (medium priority). Other less notable topics for training sessions included the development of effective interpersonal communication, the difference between normal versus "sored" horse, hands-on sessions, group discussion on the presentation of a case of an actual violator documented with videotaping, slide sets, or other visual media, how to physically set up and locate the DQP booth, discussion on alternatives to soring which may optimize the gait, and conformation of the horse.

The resources necessary for training should be funded by registration fees by the participants, but also by the HIO's, USDA, and horse show management. Possible funding sources for general education may be private/allied industry and University Cooperative Extension.

Research

The Group was in complete consensus that Education, Research and Training are a 3-way partnership necessary to enhance compliance of the HPA. Topics of research from highest to lowest priority included techniques to identify pressure shoeing and the "bad image" horse; modalities (thermography, fluoroscope, digital blood pressure and force plate analysis) for detecting soring; and screening methods for chemical analyses in the urine, blood, or hair. Other topics addressed included research on the use of action devices on the concussion of the leg and under different velocities, and alternatives to soring for training "winning"horses.

'Collaboration is synergistic' was the theme in considering who was a credible source to conduct the research. Universities were suggested to have the resources to coordinate and perform the projects, but collaboration with private veterinarians, VMO's, DQP's, USDA-ARS, Ph.D's or M.S. researchers, farriers, engineers, and animal protection groups may be synergistic to methodology, data collection, and application of the results.

There was no consensus on the technique to funding grants, either by contract funding or competitive, peer-review processes.

Impact of Specific Comments on Strategic Pan/Horse Protection Program

Joint training and "hands-on" experience for VMOs and DQPs was high priority of the discussion. Increase time requirements for training DQPs and "refresher" courses were also strongly recommended.

Research on techniques to identify pressure shoeing received the top priority for topics of research. Research should be partnered with education and training.

Recommendations-Alternatives

Education should include veterinarians, humane/animal protection organizations, lobbyists, advocates, and youth.

APPENDIX C

Proposed* Scar Rule:

Any horse born on or after January 1, 1994, that on its limbs, distal to the fetlock joint and proximal to the hoof, any of the following shall be considered to be sore: Bilateral evidence of scarring, or attempts to mask scarring, including, but not limited to, abnormal dermal or granulation tissue, areas of bilaterally thickened, raised or cosmetically/surgically altered dermal tissue and/or loss of pigmentation; and any other bilateral evidence of abuse indicative of soring, including, but not limited to, loss of hair, inflammation/edema, irritation, and moisture.


*Partially reprinted from attachments received with numerous written comments, proposed rule drafted by APHIS/USDA.