EDITORIAL:A New Dawn for the Tennessee Walking Horse Industry

A New Dawn for the Tennessee Walking Horse Industry
By Tommy Williams, Publisher of WalkingHorseChat.com

LISTEN TO AUDIO FILE OF THIS ARTICLE

The Tennessee Walking Horse industry isn’t just about horses—it’s about people. It’s about the families who’ve raised these horses for generations, the trainers who’ve spent countless hours perfecting their craft, and the fans who fill the stands at every show, cheering for their favorites. It’s about tradition, pride, and a shared love for one of the most graceful breeds in the world. But over the past few years, that tradition has been under threat. That’s why today’s ruling by United States District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk feels like a turning point—a moment to celebrate and look forward to a brighter future.

In his decision, Judge Kacsmaryk ruled in favor of the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration, Tom Gould, and Kimberly Lewis on nearly all counts. He struck down key parts of the USDA’s 2024 amendments to the Horse Protection Act, including the blanket ban on action devices, pads, and substances. He also found that the replacement of the Scar Rule didn’t give the industry a fair chance to defend itself. While the court upheld the provision about the Designated Qualified Person (DQP) program, the overall ruling is a clear win for common sense and fairness.

This decision isn’t just about legal jargon or regulatory details—it’s about real people and their livelihoods. For years, breeders, trainers, and exhibitors have been navigating a maze of regulations that made it harder to do what they love. Many felt like they were being unfairly targeted, and some even wondered if the industry could survive. But today’s ruling changes that. It’s a reminder that when we stand together and fight for what’s right, we can make a difference.

I believe 2025 will be a year of incredible growth for the Tennessee Walking Horse industry. With these unnecessary barriers lifted, we’ll see more people participating in horse shows, more families visiting training facilities, and more businesses thriving. The Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration, already a highlight of the year, will likely see record attendance, bringing a much-needed boost to local economies.

But this ruling isn’t just about economics—it’s about hope. It’s about the young girl who dreams of showing her first Tennessee Walking Horse, the breeder who’s worked tirelessly to preserve the breed’s unique characteristics, and the fan who travels miles to watch these horses perform. It’s about ensuring that the Tennessee Walking Horse remains a symbol of Southern heritage for generations to come.

As the publisher of WalkingHorseChat.com, I’ve had the privilege of hearing from so many of you—your stories, your struggles, and your triumphs. This ruling is a testament to your resilience and dedication. It’s a reminder that the Tennessee Walking Horse industry is more than just a business; it’s a community.

Looking ahead to 2025, I’m filled with optimism. This legal victory opens the door to a new era of growth, innovation, and celebration. Let’s embrace this opportunity to showcase the beauty, grace, and versatility of the Tennessee Walking Horse to the world.

Here’s to a thriving 2025 and beyond—for the horses, for the people who love them, and for the traditions that bring us all together.

Tommy Williams
Publisher, WalkingHorseChat.com



Federal Court Delivers Split Ruling on USDA Horse Protection Reforms

Federal Court Delivers Split Ruling on USDA Horse Protection Reforms

Written by: Tommy Williams
email:tommywhc@aol.com
931-492-2825
WHC Publisher-Williams Media Entertainment

LISTEN TO ARTICLE AUDIO

Federal Court Delivers Split Ruling on USDA Horse Protection Reforms
April 2 Implementation Looms for Key Provision

A U.S. District Court in Texas issued a mixed verdict Friday in the high-stakes legal battle over the USDA’s 2024 amendments to the Horse Protection Act (HPA), granting partial victories to both the Tennessee Walking Horse industry and federal regulators.

Core Rulings

  1. Equipment Ban Overturned:
    Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk struck down the USDA’s blanket prohibition on action devices, pads, and substances, ruling the agency overstepped its statutory authority. The HPA allows regulation of equipment use to prevent soring—not outright bans.
  2. Scar Rule Replacement Flawed:
    The Digital Cervical Imaging System (DCIS), intended to replace the decades-old Scar Rule for detecting soring, was deemed procedurally deficient. The court found USDA failed to establish safeguards for handlers to contest DCIS findings, violating due process.
  3. DQP Program Phase-Out Upheld:
    The court greenlit the USDA’s elimination of the Designated Qualified Person (DQP) program, which let industry-affiliated inspectors enforce HPA standards. Judge Kacsmaryk ruled this reform aligns with Congress’ intent to prevent conflicts of interest.

Immediate Impact

  • Equipment Use: Training and showing practices involving action devices (e.g., chains, weighted shoes) and lubricants may continue under existing HPA guidelines.
  • Inspections: The DQP program will sunset on April 2, 2025, per last week’s USDA extension. Federal veterinarians and agents will assume full inspection duties.
  • Legal Pathways: Plaintiffs retain the right to appeal the DQP ruling, while USDA must revise the DCIS process to include appeals and evidence challenges.

Stakeholder Reactions

  • Industry Groups: Hailed the equipment ban reversal as a “victory for tradition,” but expressed concerns about federal inspection capacity post-DQP.
  • Animal Welfare Advocates: Criticized the court for “prioritizing technicalities over horse welfare,” urging USDA to appeal the equipment ruling.

Next Steps

USDA faces a tight timeline to either:

  • Revise the DCIS and penalty review processes to comply with due process requirements.
  • Appeal the adverse rulings to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Bottom Line: While the ruling preserves certain industry practices, it solidifies federal oversight of inspections—a seismic shift for the Tennessee Walking Horse world. All eyes now turn to USDA’s next move.

Updated 1/31/2025 6:15 PM EST

 



USDA Inspector General Refused to Leave after Trump Firing

WASHINGTON (TNND) — The inspector general of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Phyllis Fong, was escorted out of her office Monday after refusing to comply with her firing by the Trump administration, according to Reuters.

Sources told the outlet that Fong intended to stay after the White House terminated her, stating she believed the administration did not follow proper protocols.

Reuters also reviewed an email Fong sent to her colleagues saying the independent Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency “has taken the position that these terminations notices do not comply with the requirements set out in law and therefore are not effective at this time.”



USDA Postpones Effective Date of New Rule: What It Means for the 2024 Season

USDA Postpones Effective Date of New Rule: What It Means for the 2024 Season

Written by: Tommy Williams
email:tommywhc@aol.com
931-492-2825
WHC Publisher-Williams Media Entertainment

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced a 60-day postponement of the effective date for its new rule, shifting it from February 1 to April 2. This decision effectively maintains the status quo for the 2024 season, ensuring that no immediate changes will disrupt current processes or operations. While the delay provides additional time for stakeholders to prepare for potential adjustments, it does not eliminate the need to stay informed about ongoing developments.

Importantly, this postponement does not alter the timeline for a separate, highly anticipated decision from a Texas judge, which is still expected to be issued by February 1. The legal proceedings in Texas remain a critical factor for many in the industry, as the ruling could have significant implications for the implementation and interpretation of the USDA’s rule. Stakeholders should continue to monitor the situation closely, as the judge’s decision could influence the broader regulatory landscape.

The USDA’s decision to delay the rule’s effective date may reflect a strategic effort to provide additional clarity and allow for further consideration of legal, logistical, and operational factors. For those impacted, this extension offers a temporary reprieve and an opportunity to refine compliance strategies, review operational workflows, and engage in discussions with relevant authorities or legal counsel.

For the 2024 season, the postponement means that everything remains unchanged for now. Producers, businesses, and other stakeholders can continue to operate under the existing framework without needing to rush to implement adjustments by February 1. However, the April 2 effective date still looms, and it is crucial to use this time wisely to prepare for any potential changes that may come into effect.

The USDA’s move highlights the dynamic nature of regulatory processes and underscores the importance of staying proactive and informed. While the delay may provide some breathing room, the industry must remain vigilant, particularly as the February 1 court decision approaches.

In conclusion, the USDA’s postponement offers a temporary extension, but it does not resolve the uncertainties surrounding the new rule or the pending legal decision in Texas. Stakeholders should take this time to stay engaged, assess potential impacts, and ensure they are well-positioned for whatever outcomes may arise in the coming months.



USDA Postpones Final Rule on Horse Protection Act: A Win for Fairness and Transparency in the Equine Industry

USDA Postpones Final Rule on Horse Protection Act: A Win for Fairness and Transparency in the Equine Industry

In a significant development for the equine community, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has announced the postponement of a final rule amending the Horse Protection Act (HPA). This decision has been met with praise from House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), who has been a vocal advocate for ensuring fair and consistent enforcement of the HPA.
Chairman Comer released a statement on January 24, 2025, applauding USDA’s decision, calling it “a victory for horse breeders, owners, and trainers nationwide.” The move comes after a series of allegations and concerns over the USDA’s enforcement practices under the Biden Administration, which prompted an investigation by the Oversight Committee during the 118th Congress.
The Horse Protection Act, enacted in 1970, was designed to eliminate the cruel practice of soring—deliberately injuring horses’ legs or hooves to achieve an exaggerated gait in competitions. While the law aims to protect horses from harm, its implementation and enforcement have long been points of contention within the equine industry. Critics have raised concerns about arbitrary enforcement, lack of due process, and inconsistent application of regulations.
In 2024, these concerns came to a head when the Oversight Committee received allegations that the Assistant Director of USDA’s APHIS had issued new competition inspection requirements just hours before a horse show. This lack of notice left organizers and participants scrambling to comply, raising questions about USDA’s transparency and operational efficiency.
Chairman Comer responded by initiating an investigation into USDA’s enforcement practices. The Oversight Committee sought documents and information to better understand APHIS’s role in implementing the HPA. Additionally, Comer issued a subpoena to a key USDA official to probe deeper into allegations of arbitrary enforcement and retribution against horse trainers.
Despite repeated requests for information, the Biden Administration’s USDA provided only limited responses to the Oversight Committee’s inquiries. This lack of transparency further fueled concerns about the agency’s accountability and decision-making processes. Chairman Comer criticized USDA’s actions, stating that safeguarding the integrity of the HPA’s enforcement is critical for maintaining trust within the equine community.
In August 2024, Comer escalated his efforts by calling on the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to review USDA’s policies and practices related to HPA implementation. The Oversight Committee emphasized the importance of ensuring that enforcement is not only consistent but also conducted within the bounds of legal authority.
The recent postponement of the final rule marks a turning point in this ongoing debate. Chairman Comer has expressed optimism that this decision will provide an opportunity for new leadership under the incoming Trump Administration to revisit and potentially abolish the controversial rule. In a letter dated January 16, 2025, Comer urged the Trump-Vance Transition Team to prioritize reforming USDA’s approach to HPA enforcement.
The equine industry has welcomed this development as a chance to restore balance and fairness. Breeders, trainers, and owners have long advocated for regulations that protect horses without imposing undue burdens or creating an atmosphere of uncertainty. The postponement signals a willingness to address these concerns and work toward a more transparent regulatory framework.
As the Trump Administration prepares to take office, all eyes will be on USDA’s new leadership to see how they handle this contentious issue. Chairman Comer has made it clear that the Oversight Committee will continue monitoring USDA’s actions to ensure accountability and transparency.
The equine community remains hopeful that future regulations will strike a balance between protecting horses from harm and respecting the rights of breeders, trainers, and owners. The postponement of the final rule provides a valuable opportunity for stakeholders to collaborate on solutions that uphold both animal welfare and industry integrity.
The USDA’s decision to postpone its final rule on the Horse Protection Act represents a critical moment for the equine industry. By addressing concerns over arbitrary enforcement and lack of transparency, this action paves the way for meaningful reform. Chairman Comer’s steadfast commitment to oversight and fairness has been instrumental in bringing these issues to light.
As this story unfolds, it serves as a reminder of the importance of government accountability and stakeholder engagement in shaping policies that impact industries nationwide. For now, horse breeders, trainers, and owners can take solace in knowing that their voices are being heard—and that steps are being taken to ensure a fairer future for all involved in the equine community.



USDA postpones final rule to amend HPA regulations for 60 days

USDA postpones final rule to amend HPA regulations for 60 days
Friday, January 24, 2025

On January 23, 2025, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will temporarily postpone its final rule to amend the Horse Protection Act (HPA) regulations for 60 days from February 1, 2025 to April 2, 2025. APHIS published the final rule (89 FR 39194-39251) amending the horse protection regulations to provide, among other provisions, that the Agency will screen, train, and authorize qualified persons for appointment by the management of any horse show, horse exhibition, or horse sale or auction to detect and diagnose soring at such events for the purposes of enforcing the HPA.  With the exception of § 11.19, which went into effect on June 7, 2024 and authorized the training of horse protection inspectors, the remainder of the rule was scheduled to go into effect on February 1, 2025.

APHIS will issue guidance to stakeholders for the upcoming horse show season in light of the postponement of the new rule.

The HPA is a federal law that prohibits sored horses from participating in shows, exhibitions, sales or auctions. The HPA also prohibits the transportation of sored horses to or from any of these events.



State Agriculture Depts request withdraw of Horse Protection Rules

Thursday, January 23, 2025

In letters to the Trump Transition team, thirteen states’ agriculture departments have asked the United States Department of Agriculture to begin the process of formally withdrawing, in its entirety, the Horse Protection Amendments final rule. The rule was originally published May 8, 2024 and would have most of its provisions become effective February 1, 2025.

Several major equine associations, including the American Horse Council had previously asked USDA to delay the effective date by 60 days but the state commissioners and directors of agriculture have gone a step further and asked USDA to formally withdraw the rule. The letters cite the need for the protection of animals but to be done with “practical and enforceable regulations.”

The letters also warn of the devastating impacts to each state if the new rules go into effect. “If implemented, the new HPA rule would devastate the equine community, especially the breeders, trainers, and horse owners nationwide. Agriculture and its related industries need policies that are helpful rather than harmful.

There is also a pending lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas’ Amarillo division challenging the USDA’s new rule. If the challenge is successful, the rule would not go into effect and would be withdrawn. The expectation is for that ruling to be rendered prior to the February 1, 2025 effective date.

The states requesting the withdrawal included:
Texas
Alabama
Florida
Kentucky
Mississippi
Nebraska
Nevada
North Carolina
Oklahoma
South Dakota
West Virginia
Tennessee
Louisiana



Oversight Committee and Comer ask Trump to delay enforcement of new rule

Wednesday, January 22, 2025

 

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and its Chairman, James Comer (R-KY) sent a letter to the Trump-Vance Transition team pointing out the major flaws in the Horse Protection Act Rule that was finalized during the Biden Administration and is set to take effect February 1, 2025. In that letter Comer asks of Trump Transition team members Howard Lutnick and Linda McMahon urge them “to use all available tools to delay enforcement of this rule, rescind any prior guidance issued under the Biden Administration, and take any necessary steps to ultimately abolish the rule and restore a commonsense approach to enforcing the HPA.”

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform launched an investigation in to the USDA’s enforcement of the HPA late last year.  The committee found during its investigation that USDA-APHIS tried to enforce the new rules almost a year before their effective date.  The Committee also had significant concerns regarding the current enforcement process, particularly focusing on the APHIS inspectors’ behavior and decision-making as well as a lack of transparency and accountability.  The investigation also discovered the potential for bias and retaliatory behavior by USDA inspectors, a claim that has been made by industry participants for years.

The letter was very clear on the need to abolish the rule.  “The Committee urgently calls for the incoming Trump Administration to take immediate steps upon assuming office toward abolition of the new Horse Protection Amendments rule, which is set to take effect on February 1, 2025.”  The committee also pointed out that enforcement actions already taken by USDA prior to this, “demonstrate a troubling disregard for procedural fairness and stakeholder engagement.”  Comer also expressed the rule undermines the due process protections for Americans.

In addition to the Committee’s request of the Trump Administration the industry, through plaintiffs The Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration, Tom Gould and Kimberly Lewis, have sued the USDA regarding the new rule.  A final ruling from Judge Kacsmaryk in the Northern District of Texas should come prior to the February 1st effective date of the rule.  If the industry is successful in its challenge in federal court, the rule would not take effect and the Trump Administration would not have to take the steps requested by the Oversight Committee as the rule would be rescinded by the court.



TWH NEWS ALERT: REGULATORY FREEZE PENDING REVIEW January 20, 2025

REGULATORY FREEZE PENDING REVIEW

January 20, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order all executive departments and agencies to take the following steps:
(1) Do not propose or issue any rule in any manner, including by sending a rule to the Office of the Federal Register (the “OFR”), until a department or agency head appointed or designated by the President after noon on January 20, 2025, reviews and approves the rule. The department or agency head may delegate this power of review and approval to any other person so appointed or designated by the President, consistent with applicable law. The Director or Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget (the “OMB Director”) may exempt any rule that he deems necessary to address emergency situations or other urgent circumstances, including rules subject to statutory or judicial deadlines that require prompt action.
(2) Immediately withdraw any rules that have been sent to the OFR but not published in the Federal Register, so that they can be reviewed and approved as described in paragraph 1, subject to the exceptions described in paragraph 1.
(3) Consistent with applicable law and subject to the exceptions described in paragraph 1, consider postponing for 60 days from the date of this memorandum the effective date for any rules that have been published in the Federal Register, or any rules that have been issued in any manner but have not taken effect, for the purpose of reviewing any questions of fact, law, and policy that the rules may raise. During this 60-day period, where appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consider opening a comment period to allow interested parties to provide comments about issues of fact, law, and policy raised by the rules postponed under this memorandum, and consider reevaluating pending petitions involving such rules. As appropriate and consistent with applicable law, and where necessary to continue to review these questions of fact, law, and policy, consider further delaying, or publishing for notice and comment, proposed rules further delaying such rules beyond the 60-day period.
(4) Following the postponement described in paragraph 3, no further action needs to be taken for those rules that raise no substantial questions of fact, law, or policy. For those rules that raise substantial questions of fact, law, or policy, agencies should notify and take further appropriate action in consultation with the OMB Director.
(5) Comply in all circumstances with any applicable Executive Orders concerning regulatory management.
As used in this memorandum, “rule” has the definition set forth in section 551(4), title 5, United States Code. It also includes any “regulatory action,” as defined in section 3(e) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, as amended, and any “guidance document” as defined in section 2(b) of Executive Order 13891 of October 9, 2019 (Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents), when that order was in effect. Thus, the requirements of this memorandum apply not only to “rules” as defined in section 551(4) of title 5, but also to any substantive action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking. They shall also apply to any agency statement of general applicability and future effect that sets forth a policy on a statutory, regulatory, or technical issue or an interpretation of a statutory or regulatory issue.
The OMB Director shall oversee the implementation of this memorandum, and any communications regarding any matters pertaining to this review should be addressed to the OMB Director. The OMB Director is also authorized to establish a process to review pending collections of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as codified in chapter 35, title 44, United States Code, and to take actions that the OMB Director deems appropriate based on that review, consistent with applicable law.
Should actions be identified that were undertaken before noon on January 20, 2025, that frustrate the purpose underlying this memorandum, I may modify or extend this memorandum, to require that department and agency heads consider taking steps to address those actions.
The OMB Director is authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law.


Equine Sports Council: Sign Petition to Congress ” Stop Rule Making….its liability and costs to horse industry”

Equine Sports Council

Take Action & Sign this Open Letter to the House of Representatives Oversight Committee as they investigate the USDA HPA. Horse Industry Leaders jointly call for a delay in the USDA Feb 1st Horse Protection Act implementation.

The HPA costs and broad liability are being forced onto all equine events, from 4H to World and National Championships, as USDA/APHIS are set to perform egregious inspections of show horses who have never been intentionally sored for performance.