opinions.” The headline accompanying the first article, which appeared Sunday, August 31, stated, " Revise the Industry or It Will Die.” This may be true, but exposing OUR problems to the nation will not solve them.
The focal point of our problem at the present is in Washington, D. C., where a bill has been presented to Congress by Senator Joseph Tydings of Maryland, a hunter-jumper enthusiast, which would provide federal
legislation to control " sore horses.” This bill( Tydings
Bill S 2543) would give representatives of the Agriculture Department the authority to make a personal decision regarding the condition of your horses and he
could, without a warrent, fine a trainer, owner, truck driver, and the manager of a horse show a maximum
of $ 500 and put everyone involved in jail for a period
not to exceed six months— or both. Recently, Representative Dan Kuykendall of Tennessee presented a
similar bill to the House of Representatives. This, my friends, is a problem!
The practice of " soring” Tennessee Walking Horses as a training technique dates back to the 1950’ s. It has been said that trainers of other breeds have been using similar techniques for years but have learned to avoid detection. It is rumored that a Middle Tennessee trainer stumbled upon the technique quite by accident, and was actually trying to cure a bad case of thrush( similar to athlete’ s foot in humans) when he noticed the results of a mild mustard-oil remedy. Since the discovery of this original technique, we have witnessed a progression of trial-and-error devices, most of which have failed. We have seen a ten-year experimental period in which our horses improved in performance, quality and acceptance, but always hanging over us was the ominous " sore horse” indictment.
During the early 1960’ s we saw the advent of the " big-lick” horse that carried the full load of drastic training devices. It was in January of 1960 that a now-famous article appeared in SPORTS ILLUSTRAT ED in which these training devices were described as
" torture,” and the writer called for an end to such treatment. It was here that we began to feel the effect of several things, including pressure from other breed
enthusiasts that were feeling the effects of the newfound popularity of the Tennessee Walking Horse. Our breed was becoming more and more popular with spectators, and people were selling their other stock and buying Walking Horses. New stables were cropping up all over the country and the demand for trainers far exceeded the availablity of capable people. Horse owners were willing to pay a good wage to anyone who could " train” a Tennessee Walking Horse.
In their haste to get started, a lot of these newcomers began to take short cuts to training. They also experimented with all sorts of devices which eventually led to a drastic situation. Opponents of our breed began to hear rumors about some very cruel and barbaric techniques that had been tried and, without checking to see if they were true or whether they worked or not, jumped on the bandwagon to describe them as typical in training Walking Horses. The use of chains and boots has played a big part in the drama of the modern-day Tennessee Walking Horse. Ever since the early days, horsemen have been using chains to train their horses to pick their feet up off the ground. Around 1956, when boots were first introduced for Walking Horses in the showring, another change began taldng place. The boot was originally intended to protect the front foot from the overstriding movement of the back foot, but Walking
Horse trainers soon learned that the boot could affect the movement of their horse and improve the gait.
This eventually developed into a problem also as unique devices were tried in the boots. As the condition of our horses’ feet worsened, steps were taken to control the situation. The Celebration dropped the boots for inspection in the showring for the first time
in 1960. The following year, this became a common practice in showrings all over the country. Dropping
the boots also gave the exhibitors an opportunity to change boots in the ring... which became another problem.
The situation continued to rock along for several years with rules and regulations being altered to fit the condition at the time. Various authorities tried to establish a measure of control, with no appreciable effect. The breed continued to spiral upward in popularity and acceptance, and our problems were compounded by the mere fact that the Tennessee Walking Horse was a very exciting and comfortable showring performer.
By the 1960’ s many people who had been lovers of our breed for years turned to other breeds rather
than be a party to such practices. The abused horse became commonplace and we tended to look the other way when they lined up. A lot of trainers and amateurs either could not( by virtue of the fact that they did not know how) or would not employ these training techniques on their horses in order to compete. They have gradually dropped by the wayside and still long for the day when we return to the easy-going, comfortable gait which they could maintain.
In 1967 an effort was made to organize the Walking Horse trainers and to give them the full responsibility
for " cleaning up their own house.” The majority of trainers responded to their new organization and a major effort was made to draft rules and regulations that were acceptable to everyone. The American Humane Association sent a representative from Denver to meet with the Walking Horse trainers, and representatives of several other organizations made an effort to cooperate. The first year was productive and considerable progress was made in many areas.
In 1968 a movement was begun to change the inspection system involving Tennessee Walking Horses. The procedure was to check all horses and boots outside the ring and forego the " boot-dropping” ceremony inside the ring. Considerable problems developed, especially at American Horse Shows Association shows, as eager stewards and ill-prepared veterinarians seized
the opportunity to eliminate as many Walking Horses as possible from the showring. Unscrupulous exhibitors soon embarked on the practice of " turning in” their competitors with the hope of eliminating them from competition. In many instances, especially if the steward or veterinarian was a friend, it worked very well, and we have seen many fine horses returned to the
barn as being " unfit” for competition. The situation soon turned into a discussion as to what constituted
a " scar,” and whether or not it would grow hair.
Despite all the recent adverse publicity the situation regarding training techniques and the condition of our horses is getting better and better. For the past two years we have had an awareness among our trainers( professional and otherwise) to " clean up” their stock and most of them are doing an excellent job. The " sore horse” is on the way out!
We discussed this issue with a lot of professional trainers and were advised that the vast majority of
( Continued on page 60)
September / October, 1969 57