Update from Vicki Tobin of the Equine Welfare Alliance
Pro-Slaughter Group Leaks Misinformation to Press, Again!
Horse Tripping in Sacramento - photo by Karen Tapia-Andsersen
The first reading of the horse tripping was held yesterday and went well. Several of our advocates have been working hard and I want to send a special thanks to Willis Lamm, Eric Mills, Carrol Abel, Beverly McGrath and especially to ASPCA for sponsoring the bill. My apologies if I missed anyone but I don’t have the names of everyone that has been working this. Our opponents are still trying to pull the HSUS rhetoric and did so at the meeting and were corrected. No doubt, they’ll continue to say HSUS is behind this and out to ban rodeos.
Willis sent a spectacular email to coxtv.com correcting an inaccurate AP story that someone must have fed to them. He has given me permission to share it with you. Below his email is information on what you can do to help to ensure passage of this legislation and notes from the meeting.
I usually don’t quarrel with news stories however a story that appears on your site, Animal Activists Going After Rodeo Horse Events, is grossly incorrect. The one true fact in the story is that the Legislature is considering a state wide ban on horse tripping. However the charrerias (Mexican rodeos) outlawed horse tripping in the US many years ago. In researching this issue for the Animal Services Advisory Board, Mr. Ramiro Rodriguez , President of the ACA, wrote me, “The charros in the US do not trip the horses when they do manganas in any competition, whoever trips a horse (intentionally) is suspended for a whole year.”
Horse tripping is not a recognized event in any form of sanctioned rodeo. It is a shadow sport similar to dog fighting. So the issue has absolutely no relationship to rodeos.
Two counties, Clark and Lyon, currently have bans on horse tripping and Washoe has such an ordinance under consideration. The Lyon County ordinance was passed in 2008 after the Sheriff’s Dept. raised concerns about some incidents that took place. After passage the world didn’t end and legitimate charrerias were not affected whatsoever.
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with rodeos nor is it some back door attempt to attack rodeo and livestock events. I’m one of the first to tout Nevada‘s safety record when it comes to sanctioned rodeos and livestock events, but I certainly testified in favor of this bill.
My grave concern about this story, and it is grave, is that it discredits everyone involved. The advocates, humane organizations and governmental entities involved are characterized as “animal rights activists” who appear to want to shut down rodeo activities. The bill was actually advanced by the ASPCA with support of humane associations and animal services agencies. The story’s characterizations make our legitimate rodeos look bad which is unfortunate since our rodeo associations take safety of animals and participants very seriously.
Finally, and worst of all, the story suggests that the Mexican charrerias in the United States conduct horse tripping events, something that only fuels prejudice and ethnic mistrust based on a completely false premise. So let’s have a new reason for people to hate a specific ethnic segment of our population.
I realize your site merely presented an AP story. However it is my belief that aside from its inaccuracies it is unreasonably harmful to all the parties involved in the story. It consists of sensation, not accurate news. I formally request that you remove the present story and replace it with a locally produced story that is accurate, and that you forward my concerns to AP. A good start would be by contacting Senator Allison Copening, the bill’s sponsor, or Committee Chair Mark Manendo.
There are just so many ways that this story can create trouble. If it were accurate then the chips should fall where they may. Given that it is not accurate, a retraction or corrected tag story should be issued.
Willis Lamm, Vice Chair
Lyon County Animal Services Advisory Board
We encourage all of you to write to the committee in Nevada that will be hearing the bill, particularly Chairman Manendo (committee contact info is at the bottom of this email). Feel free to take comments from Willis’ email or the below bullet points summarizing points from the meeting. We want to ensure this legislation passes into law and want to thank everyone that wrote letters for the first reading. They were mentioned at the meeting. As with all correspondence, it is preferred you use your own words so the letters don’t appear to be form letters.
1. Nobody seems to be willing to say that they support horse tripping.
2. A ban on tripping will not impact any legitimate sanctioned events.
3. A state wide ban on tripping will help local agencies police horse events.
4. A ban on tripping will not affect any other rodeo or equine events.
5. A ban on tripping will not affect normal ranching, veterinary or training activities.
6. A ban on tripping will enhance Nevada’s image with respect to the fact that the state strives to run reasonable safe equine and livestock events that would be appropriate for families of all ages to attend.
Here are Willis’ notes from the meeting:
It was an interesting afternoon at the Senate Natural Resources Committee. The committee didn’t get under way until 4:00 (members were at other meetings that were running late) but the first issue was SB364.
The pro SB364 speakers were organized and brought in relevant supporting documents. The Lyon County Animal Services Advisory Board was among the organizations and entities officially supporting the bill.
In contrast the anti SB364 speakers drifted all over the map citing all kinds of speculation, some of which the Committee Chair called them down on and made them admit that they had no data or documentation in which to back their claims. Someone from the Reno Rodeo Association presented a rambling theory about how banning horse tripping was the next step in banning rodeos. I personally thought that the Reno Rodeo Assn. was more savvy and “together” than that, and the Chairman summed things up by saying that this was a hearing on horse tripping, nothing more, and that nobody can predict what any future legislature is going to so so he’s not going to worry about it.
Even some of the public present for other bills who didn’t really care for a horse tripping ban were demonstrating body language supportive of the ban – rolling their eyes and looking across the room when someone presented a profoundly stupid argument against the bill.
The real show stopper was when one speaker argued that a horse tripping ban would lead to Texas taking away the National Finals Rodeo from Nevada. The Chair asked the speaker on what data the argument was based? The speaker had none. Then the Chair asked how Nevada’s passing a horse tripping ban would affect the NFR. After the speaker stumbled around expressing some circuitous logic the Chair pointed out that Texas already had a horse tripping ban, so what’s the difference? The speaker excused himself and sat down.
The charreria folks all explained that their associations had banned horse tripping years ago and so they opposed a law banning horse tripping. The ethnic card got played. The Chair asked, “don’t you still have your events even though your own associations have banned horse tripping?” The answer, of course, had to be “yes.” Finally the Chair had enough. He asked the standing room only crowd (including the video link from Las Vegas) for a show of hands. Who here today actually approves of horse tripping?
“Let the record show that nobody raised their hands, so it looks like we’re all in agreement here.”
The committee moved on to hear SB299.
One complaint expressed by an anti-SB364 speaker was that passing the bill could be perceived by folks that we have a problem here in Nevada and that would project a negative image. So after the hearing I made some calls and the responses I got was that they felt that SB364 actually shored up Nevada’s image in that the state was serious about events involving animals that are profoundly dangerous. Some of them may contact the committee and indicate that this bill is a good thing as it reassures parents that equestrian and livestock events in Nevada should be appropriate places to go as families, avoiding the likelihood that young children would be exposed to a horrific activity.
I give Chairman Manendo high marks for liberally allowing public comment but bringing the issue back on focus when necessary.
This was just the first reading. Hopefully the bill will move forward without interference and the Assembly Committee hearing will be just as rational.
Mark Manendo, Chair – email@example.com
John Jay Lee – firstname.lastname@example.org
David Parks – email@example.com
Michael Roberson – firstname.lastname@example.org
Dean Rhoads – email@example.com