Originally, this column started out with a diatribe about the importance of voting. It is election year, after all. I’ll spare you the lecture about the importance of your vote. Hopefully, you already know. We won’t spend time on the urgency of the issues. Hopefully, you already know about those too.

When it comes to someone’s income and/or opportunity, there’s bound to be reaction – positive and more than likely otherwise. The March 1 editorial is in regards to a non-pro’s belief that the system is stacked, that trainers’ wives and kids have an advantage in the competitive cutting pen. This non-pro, like others who have voiced similar sentiments, would not dare mention their concerns in polite cutting public, lest they be considered a complainer. Plus, they need help at that next cutting.

Truth is, I made a mistake in the “Family Time” editorial in the print issue. I wrote that the 2011 National Cutting Horse Association Futurity didn’t have a trainer’s wife or trainer’s child in the first seven places of the Non-Pro division. I was wrong. A trainer’s child won the Non-Pro Championship. This means that at last year’s biggest limited-age cuttings, Augusta was the only show where a trainer’s family member didn’t win a Non-Pro or Limited Non-Pro title. The Insights published online has the correct information.

As for the Insights column in the March 15 issue, a former non-pro, one who became one of the best in the business offers another viewpoint.

He said, “I think the trainers’ wives and kids have perhaps better opportunities to be coached and more opportunities to ride, but I don’t think they have an advantage of having better horses to show.

“Some non-pros can afford to go out and buy the horses that are available for sale and then take those horse and compete. Some non-pros have a ‘regular’ job, and they can’t spend all day riding horses and training horses. Some non-pros have more time and opportunity to ride, but they cannot afford to buy or keep the best horses. That’s all life. Rules and new classes won’t make everyone equal.”

Let me be clear right here, I am NOT promoting the soring techniques used to encourage high-stepping performances in gaited horses. But it’s obvious that a well-intentioned regulation has taken on a life of its own as officials from the United States Department of Agriculture are inspecting Tennessee Walking Horses at shows.

The article provides basic coverage of the 73^rd Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration last weekend in Shelbyville, Tenn. The big news was the elimination by USDA inspectors of two horses, Dark And Shady and Moody Star, both favorites coming into the show. According to the news report, Dark And Shady was disqualified “for an alleged HPA (Horse Protection Act) violation, and Moody Star was excused because of a “scar-rule violation.” The article went on to report that of the 1,063 horses entered, 84 were issued HPA violations. And keep in mind, these horse owners/trainers went to the show KNOWING their horses would be subject to inspections by federal officials, and still those horses were cited.

Chip Cirillo, the reporter who wrote the article, interviewed Dark And Shady’s trainer, Jimmy McConnell, who said, “The government went nuts. They don’t know what they’re doing. Absolutely don’t know what they’re doing.”

Keep in mind, McConnell – like all of the other trainers, riders and owners at those shows – will be subject to the discretion of those federal officials time and time again down the road. And still, he was to the point where he was willing to voice his opinion.

Again, I don’t promote cruelty to horses – or dogs, chickens, cattle, pigs, hamsters, frogs, or any other living being. But I do know there are times when what one person believes is a humane training (or handling) technique can be interpreted as abuse by another. Sure, there are obvious violations and any person with an ounce of commonsense recognizes those instances. Those should not be tolerated in our associations.

But what about hobbling a horse? What about using spurs? What about saddle spots? What about the adminstration of psychotropic drugs? What about using certain bits or stud chains? What about checking a horse around in the stall? God forbid, what about keeping a young horse tied to the fence all day?

There are some (well, actually many) out there who view all of those as abusive. I guess the point that I’m trying to get across is that we in the Western performance horse industry better ask ourselves this question: What if our industry was subject to the same USDA inspection standards as the Tennessee Walking Horse industry?

First article - one with McConnell's comments

Second article - one with additional facts and figures