I received this article via email from the Walking Horse Report. I'm not a member, but I received the information anyway. I'm glad they sent it to me. My thoughts on this decision are below the article.
-------------------------
NHSC Votes To Dissolve
Copyright 2009 WHR
By Jeffrey Howard
SHELBYVILLE, Tenn. – The National Horse Show Commission (NHSC) Board of Directors unanimously voted today to dissolve the NHSC and turn over the assets of the NHSC to SHOW, the Horse Industry Organization (HIO) of The Celebration, Inc. The NHSC board consists of Chairman Link Webb, David Landrum, Steve Hankins and Jamie Hankins from the Walking Horse Trainers’ Association (WHTA). Representing the Walking Horse Owners’ Association (WHOA) are Frank Neal, David Pruett, Mark Farrar and Bob Medina.
The meeting began with Medina participating via a conference call. There was a question raised regarding his physical presence being required to vote. After a brief discussion and review of the bylaws, it was determined that Medina would be allowed to participate via conference call and cast his vote. Alternates were on hand and would have been able to sit in his place
Several questions were raised by Farrar including the timeline for the transfer to take place, the status of contracts, the status of suspensions and how to dissolve a corporation in Tennessee. Per the contract question, all horse shows that have affiliated with the NHSC will still be affiliated and after the transfer will become affiliated with the SHOW HIO. Those horse shows that would like to change affiliations will be allowed to do so.
Also, the contract with the Kentucky HIO that allows the sharing of judges of both the NHSC and Kentucky HIO will have to be renegotiated by SHOW. Landrum informed the board that the Kentucky HIO is willing to continue this agreement with the new HIO.
After the parameters were established the new business came to the floor and the members of the NHSC had a very intense discussion. “We need to make sure we do this correct. We have been here a long time and we need to be careful how we do this,” said Landrum. “The NHSC has been here a long time and done its job,” said Webb. “However it is time for this industry to make a change,” concluded Webb.
Steve Hankins joined in, “It is very important that we have lots of communication with the new HIO so that WHTA and WHOA are kept informed of the progress.”
There has been some confusion on the dissolution of the NHSC before SHOW has agreed to assume the responsibilities of the NHSC. “It is my understanding that SHOW will not vote on this until all of our groups (WHOA, WHTA and NHSC) have decided this is what we want,” said Webb.
“There is no assurance to this day that SHOW will agree to do this,” said Neal. The Celebration board has met once in an information session and has also participated in some capacity on the WHOA conference calls and meetings. It is assumed in the industry that SHOW will begin work immediately to activate its HIO and be affiliating horse shows as soon as possible.
Medina made one last plea to the board to keep the judging and rule book under “NHSC (B)” and allow the functions of the HIO and compliance to move to SHOW. This idea was rejected by the other members of the board that felt it was best SHOW assume all responsibilities. “We either need to do it all or none,” said Webb.
The next topic was that of the monies and how they would be distributed after dissolution. The NHSC has a checking account with $71,118 and a CD with $40,000. Neal and the others felt that monies contributed by WHOA and WHTA should be returned to those respective groups. All affiliation fees should be transferred to SHOW. Year-to-date 73 horse shows and sales have affiliated with the NHSC.
The NHSC board felt that a $5,000 amount should also be transferred to SHOW as seed money in addition to all affiliation fees. Past due amounts from 2007 and 2008 will become the property of WHOA and WHTA once they are collected. The past due amounts from these years totals almost $30,000.
Kim Bennett raised the question of assets loaned to the NHSC and whether they would be transferred to SHOW. It was agreed that no assets not owned by the NHSC could be transferred. Bennett also asked about show records. “It is my assumption that the show records would go to SHOW,” concluded Webb.
A short recess was taken and upon the return of the members the final motion was made to dissolve the NHSC by Medina and seconded by Landrum. It read as follows:
“I make a motion to dissolve the NHSC effective on a date specified by Dr. Meadows in a notice to WHOA President Frank Neal and WHTA President Link Webb.
I further move that all employees of the NHSC become the employees of SHOW at the same salary and benefits effective on the same date of Dr. Meadows’ notification.
I further move that all records, equipment and all other assets and supplies of the NHSC other than the excess cash over amounts paid by future show affiliations less $5,000, other than all accounts receivable arising from shows already completed become the property of SHOW for a payment of $1 by SHOW on the same date of Dr. Meadows’ notification.
I further move that all liabilities of the NHSC including the lease on its office be assumed on the effective date of Dr. Meadows’ notification.
I further move that all contracts arising out of any show affiliations will be assumed and honored by SHOW effective on the date of Dr. Meadows’ notification. And until the notification date, the NHSC will perform all the necessary duties to all shows that affiliated with the NHSC.
I move that upon dissolution of the NHSC that any funds remaining in the NHSC be divided 50/50 between the WHT and WHOA.”
The vote was taken by roll call and all eight members voted in favor of the motion. “This is tough to give up. I have been here a long time and remember the days in the basement. We probably need a prayer session that we have done the right thing, but I think we have,” said Landrum. He continued, “We don’t need more HIOs, we need to pull together and take a new direction. If you think this business isn’t hurting, then you aren’t in the same position I am. We are shrinking in credibility and market share and I can promise you that whether this is right or not, the intent is to do the right thing. This can make WHOA, WHTA and TWHBEA stronger organizations. We can all focus on what we do best.”
Neal gave his summary as well. “I’ve always thought the NHSC was doing a good job. It’s had its faults over the years as will the new one (HIO). This isn’t my livelihood but it is scary to me to think how this has been done without everyone sitting at a table and hashing it out. However the makeup of the WHOA board is a lot of your (Trainers) customers and this is what we have voted to do. When the board votes 19-6, I have to vote the wishes of the board. I hope it is the right thing because if it is not, this could be the beginning of the end for the padded horse. You have given up a lot, almost everything and I hope you will be able to live with it. Anything I can do to make it work better, I am happy to do it,” said Neal.
Webb joined in, “There are no guarantees. At this point the industry is not going anywhere for whatever reason. Every day for the last two years I have heard the same thing, the trainers need to get out of the compliance of the industry. I think we are making the right decision and taking a hell of a step. We took a hell of step in the 1970s when we started checking the horses and today we make this step to help the industry strive more. If we will stand together as WHOA and WHTA it will make us stronger.”
A historic day is upon us and the industry will enter into another phase of its long and successful history. The Tennessee Walking Horse is one of the greatest breeds in the world and today’s vote is taken in an attempt to gain the attention and credibility this horse deserves. As many stated in the meeting, there are no guarantees and this signals only the beginning, but therein lies the key phrase; this is the beginning.
The industry finds itself at a crossroads and the trainers and owners have made some very difficult decisions they feel will position the industry to move forward. This next transition period may be difficult, but decisions such as today’s are best made for the long-term success of the breed.
The Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration will now vote to decide its course of action as well as the timeline for the transfer. It is assumed that the Celebration will vote to take on the task of activating its HIO, implement an independent oversight board and move the transition along as quickly as possible.
------------------------
What I see here is that they're only switching the HIO as to where the rulebook is going to be governed. I don't see this making a big difference in the long run. We know that the WHTA is full of those who continue to sore their horses and support those who sore, so they are going to do things just to try to make themselves look better. I agree that there need to be less HIOs, and dissolving the NHSC is a good move. But I don't believe that the move is being made to help the horse. It's being made to make WHTA look good on the surface, but it's just another ploy to further their insane need to continue to abuse animals for profit.
I also understand that WHOA was originally founded to help eliminate the sore horse. However, the sore horse industry bullied WHOA into allowing sore horses in with their usual money bribes. WHOA is not it's own entity anymore--it is really run by those who are corrupt within the industry, just another group that's been bullied and cannonized. Neal said in his quote that WHOA is made up of the WHTA's customers, so of course they're going to do what makes them money and keeps things status quo.
I agree with what many people have said in response to this news: put the rulebook with the breed registry like all other breed registries do and dissolve all HIOs that support the Big Lick and carry their own rulebooks. This decision is not a step in any direction, backwards or forwards, just a continued move in the fight to keep the sore horse in the ring. May the USDA see right through these jerks and be out in force at WHOA and SHOW affilated shows.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
ARTICLE and NEWS - LET THE HORSES TALK: USDA draws a line in the sand
I hadn't posted this information yet because I had only heard about it through speculations. Now the info has been released to the public and we're seeing some real progress.
The USDA is out in force and working hard, and perhaps something is going to break free. Let's hope it's the horses and that they break free of the chains and contraptions that are ruining this breed. There seems to be a light at the end of this very black and bleak tunnel.
Marshall County Tribune: Story:
Let the horses talk: USDA draws a line in the sand
Friday, March 13, 2009 - By Tom Sumners - www.marshalltribune.com
In what could be a pivotal year for the Tennessee Walking Horse industry, optimism could turn to pessimism. The United States Department of Agriculture has implemented changes in the way the Horse Protection Act will be enforced for the 2009 season. Several meetings have been held since the first of the year to explain the changes.
One of the most notable changes is that no saddle or tail brace may be on the horse when coming to the inspection area. Horses may be subject to looking into their mouths and under their tails for foreign objects or distractions. The inspectors (Veterinary Medical Officers or VMOs) will also have the authority to have shoes pulled for further diagnosis when a farrier is available, and hoof testers may be used on flat-shod and padded horses. Also, there will be inspections of the warm-up ring, barns, horse trailers, and so forth.
The National Horse Show Commission inspectors (Designated Qualified Persons or DQPs) will not be permitted to inspect a horse owned by a member of the DQP's immediate family or owned by a DQP's employer.
The VMO and DQP inspectors will always be allowed to carry out their duties with limitations. An area of contention for several years has been the interpretation of the scar rule. Another clinic is to be held in the near future to discuss this in more detail.
With this being said, the Walking Horse Trainers' Association (WHTA) Board of Directors has recommended that the National Horse Show Commission (NHSC) be removed as its Horse Industry Organization (HIO) and ask the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration to implement their HIO, which is called SHOW, to assume the NHSC's function.
This decision was made after two days of meetings focusing on the best strategy to move the walking horse industry forward. The Celebration will take this under advisement. The NHSC is made up of an eight-person board consisting of four WHTA representatives and four from the Walking Horse Owners Association (WHOA). A special called meeting of the membership of the WHTA was held on Monday, March 9, and approved the board's recommendation to leave the NHSC. In so doing, the WHTA board of directors voted to reschedule the upcoming Trainers' show at a later date.
There will be a transition period to get the new HIO operational. This will make a more independent HIO and remove the stigma of conflicts of interest that has existed for many years. Evidently, the USDA has not been pleased with self-enforcement of the industry. With that said and done, the USDA has drawn a line in the sand to let everyone know enforcement of the Horse Protection Act will take place and that the welfare of the horse is first and foremost on their agenda. LET THE HORSES TALK
The USDA is out in force and working hard, and perhaps something is going to break free. Let's hope it's the horses and that they break free of the chains and contraptions that are ruining this breed. There seems to be a light at the end of this very black and bleak tunnel.
**********
Marshall County Tribune: Story:
Let the horses talk: USDA draws a line in the sand
Friday, March 13, 2009 - By Tom Sumners - www.marshalltribune.com
In what could be a pivotal year for the Tennessee Walking Horse industry, optimism could turn to pessimism. The United States Department of Agriculture has implemented changes in the way the Horse Protection Act will be enforced for the 2009 season. Several meetings have been held since the first of the year to explain the changes.
One of the most notable changes is that no saddle or tail brace may be on the horse when coming to the inspection area. Horses may be subject to looking into their mouths and under their tails for foreign objects or distractions. The inspectors (Veterinary Medical Officers or VMOs) will also have the authority to have shoes pulled for further diagnosis when a farrier is available, and hoof testers may be used on flat-shod and padded horses. Also, there will be inspections of the warm-up ring, barns, horse trailers, and so forth.
The National Horse Show Commission inspectors (Designated Qualified Persons or DQPs) will not be permitted to inspect a horse owned by a member of the DQP's immediate family or owned by a DQP's employer.
The VMO and DQP inspectors will always be allowed to carry out their duties with limitations. An area of contention for several years has been the interpretation of the scar rule. Another clinic is to be held in the near future to discuss this in more detail.
With this being said, the Walking Horse Trainers' Association (WHTA) Board of Directors has recommended that the National Horse Show Commission (NHSC) be removed as its Horse Industry Organization (HIO) and ask the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration to implement their HIO, which is called SHOW, to assume the NHSC's function.
This decision was made after two days of meetings focusing on the best strategy to move the walking horse industry forward. The Celebration will take this under advisement. The NHSC is made up of an eight-person board consisting of four WHTA representatives and four from the Walking Horse Owners Association (WHOA). A special called meeting of the membership of the WHTA was held on Monday, March 9, and approved the board's recommendation to leave the NHSC. In so doing, the WHTA board of directors voted to reschedule the upcoming Trainers' show at a later date.
There will be a transition period to get the new HIO operational. This will make a more independent HIO and remove the stigma of conflicts of interest that has existed for many years. Evidently, the USDA has not been pleased with self-enforcement of the industry. With that said and done, the USDA has drawn a line in the sand to let everyone know enforcement of the Horse Protection Act will take place and that the welfare of the horse is first and foremost on their agenda. LET THE HORSES TALK
Monday, March 2, 2009
HOW YOU CAN HELP - Writing Letters, Part 3: Sample Letter with Edits
My previous two posts about Writing Letters have covered word use and basic formatting requirements. The following is the letter that actually spawned this three-part post. A friend recently sent the following letter she'd written to the judge who was in charge of the Cleve Wells case in Texas. She wanted to express her opinion as a horse trainer and buisness owner as to why Wells should have been prosecuted. She sent it to a bunch of friends for critique. Of course, being the English-use and correct format freak that I am, I sent some suggestions back to her. She let me post her letter here to help show how a letter can be changed to be more effective and more apt to be taken seriously.
My friend's letter is in blue text; my comments are in red text.
To the office of
District Attorney
Honorable Dale Hanna
Phone (817) 556-6802
Fax (817) 556-6816
Guinn Justice Center
204 S. Buffalo Ave Room 209
Cleburne, Texas 76033
Re: SLOW LOPIN SCOTCH It would probably be better if your reason for the letter was Cleve Wells, or the actual case number, if you can find it. They most likely won't remember the horse's name (unfortunately).
It has recently come to my attention that the district attorneys office has chosen a discretionary rejection concerning the case against Mr. Cleve Wells for his role in the abuse of a horse under his care named Slow Lopin Scotch.
All I can do is shake my head in amazement and wonder why and how this ever could have happened? use a period here instead of a ? It has been stated that your office has received a large amount of correspondence concerning Mr. Wells and his abusive habits which he calls horse training. I should also hope you have read a good number of first hand accounts of the actions of Mr. Wells. I can assure you that there is absolutely NO reason on earth a horse should suffer the injuries to the extent of those displayed in the pictures of Slow Lopin Scotch, nor the sheer torture he surely endured. NONE whatsoever! Delete this last sentence. Dramatic language such as this is ignored and it can reflect bad on you. Take out all capital letter words as well.
From what I understand the discretionary rejection was chosen due in part to many of the occurrences you learned of, happening outside of your jurisdiction. If this is true, did you not consider that this ONE case is YOUR chance to STOP someone who obviously has no regard for animals? Turn this into a sentence rather than a question. This is a very derogatory question toward the DA--if I were him, I'd drop your letter right now and not read the rest. You want to approach him with facts, not be accusatory. Accusations only piss people off. If the other occurrences happened in places outside of your jurisdiction, that should tell you in no uncertain terms, Mr. Wells behaves in this same ruthless, uncaring and callous manner while he is away at horse shows and most likely while IN the public eye. If he behaves this badly and is this abusive to animals in public, there is no telling what happens to them at ‘home’ on his property and behind his barn doors.
It has also been stated that Mr. Wells claims one of his employees is at fault for the injuries suffered by Slow Lopin Scotch. Again, let me assure you, take "let me assure you" out--another accusatory statement, as if you know more than him. Okay, of course you do, but you don't want to question his job as the DA. whether the injuries came from the abusive hands of Mr. Wells or one of his employees, the horse was indeed AT his facility, ON his property and UNDER the care, custody and control of Mr. Wells. Therefore Mr. Wells is ultimately responsible for the well being of the horse. Again, take out the capital letters. He'll get it whether the words are capitalized or not.
The horses’ well being while at a training facility is similar to dropping your children off at school. While on school grounds it is the responsibility of the school faculty and staff under the guidance of the principal, to provide your child with a safe learning environment. It is the same responsibility of the facility owner and/or manager to ensure each horse is safe and cared for while they are on their property and under their care. Delete this whole paragraph. There are people who would not believe this to be true, so it's not a very good comparison. Most people do not equate animals as being as important as children--they are livestock or product.
My husband and I train horses and we have never, never had to abuse an animal in any manner, way, shape or form, to get them to perform. To carry that one step further, our horses perform much more difficult work- cutting as per NCHA, and jumping, which is far more difficult than merely performing three gaits (walk, jog and lope) around an arena. Might I also add that abused horses will just not ‘try’ as hard to please as those treated fairly with kindness, patience and respect. Okay, this is a hard one. Most people, and most likely this DA, aren't going to know what "gaits," "cutting," "NCHA," "lope," or even "arena" means. I believe it's important for you to point out that you are horse trainers and you have been more successful with kindness, patience and respect rather than abusing a horse. But put it in terms a layman would know. Point out the successes of people like Clinton Anderson, the Parellis, and Monty Roberts. Give an example of a horse that came to you abused, and your methods changed that horse's attitude.
Mr. Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have absolutely NO bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. NONE! Remove "NONE!" and take out the capital letters. The horse may have been able to perform to the top levels of the ‘sport’ of showing Mr. Wells aspires to, but following the abuse and torture this horse endured, the mental capacities of Slow Lopin Scotch may never be able to handle even ‘normal’ day to day care, without the long term effects of Mr. Wells’ abuse resurfacing time and again. Again, we're dealing with someone who probably has no sympathy for horses. So I would change this paragraph to read as follows:
Mr... Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have no bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. The owners most likely paid the same price for training as did other horses in Mr. Wells' barn that are worth more money. Therefore, they deserve to receive the same treatment and results as other horse owners receive at Mr. Wells' barn.
I ask that you reconsider the case against Mr. Wells for the abuse Slow Lopin Scotch endured. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished, just shows that the abuse of animals in your county and under your jurisdiction is considered acceptable. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished also shows those working for the county in the animal control division that although they do their jobs and try to bring justice to those who abuse, they will not be taken seriously if and when the abuser is reprimanded or taken into custody. EXCELLENT paragraph!
If this case is not taken any further and Mr. Wells receives no punishment for his abusive actions or his careless inaction to get proper care for the horse, i.e. calling the veterinarian, this is what the country will perceive, as many eyes are on you. Horse people across the country are watching and hoping for justice to finally be done. This is but one step in a long uphill battle. Way to stick it to him--hitting them where it hurts, which includes their reputation and their pocketbook, is very wise. You can also find out when the next election is and point out that he can lose votes, things like that.
I ask that you take a long hard look at each picture submitted of Slow Lopin Scotch and his injuries and imagine for a moment it were you. Imagine that you had open lacerations left untreated, open and likely infected wounds oozing pus and foul odors that you had to smell constantly. Imagine that you are the one with bone fragments in your jaw causing undetermined amounts of pain as you try to eat. Take this paragraph out. Many, many people don't view animals as having feelings and won't put themselves in their shoes/paws. Plus, if this guy dismissed the case, then he obviously doesn't care much about the feelings of animals.
I ask you again to reconsider the case against Mr. Wells. If for nobody else, reconsider it for Slow Lopin Scotch and the number of other horses who will surely suffer the same torture, should Cleve Wells go unpunished. Again, he won't care about the horse, so remove this paragraph. Ending your letter with a dig at what his decision will reflect leaves him with something very strong to think about.
Thank You,
Name
Business Name
Address
Phone
Here's the same letter that has all the above changes that I've made. (Red + Blue = Purple!)
It has recently come to my attention that the district attorneys office has chosen a discretionary rejection concerning the case against Mr. Cleve Wells for his role in the abuse of a horse under his care named Slow Lopin Scotch.
All I can do is shake my head in amazement and wonder why and how this ever could have happened. It has been stated that your office has received a large amount of correspondence concerning Mr. Wells and his abusive habits which he calls horse training. I should also hope you have read a good number of first hand accounts of the actions of Mr. Wells.
From what I understand the discretionary rejection was chosen due in part to many of the occurrences you learned of happening outside of your jurisdiction. If this is true, then this opportunity to stop someone who obviously has no regard for animals has been completely passed by. If the other occurrences happened in places outside of your jurisdiction, that should communitcate that, in no uncertain terms, Mr. Wells behaves in this same ruthless, uncaring and callous manner while he is away at horse shows and most likely while in the public eye. If he behaves this badly and is this abusive to animals in public, there is no telling what happens to them at ‘home’ on his property and behind his barn doors.
It has also been stated that Mr. Wells claims one of his employees is at fault for the injuries suffered by Slow Lopin Scotch. Again, whether the injuries came from the abusive hands of Mr. Wells or one of his employees, the horse was indeed at his facility, physically on his property and therefore under the care, custody and control of Mr. Wells. Therefore, Mr. Wells is ultimately responsible for the well being of the horse.
My husband and I train horses and we have never had to resort to methods that cause injuries to an animal in any manner, way, shape, or form to get them to perform. As horse trainers, we have been far more successful with kidness, patience and respect rather than resorting to the kinds of abusive methods Mr. Wells used on Slow Lopin Scotch. This success is not just prevalent in our personal business; dozens of public figures that are considered high quality horse trainers such as Monty Roberts, Clinton Anderson, Pat and Linda Parelli, and Dennis Reis use positive reinforcement and not in punishment in their day-to-day training, and that message is strong and widely accepted as the "right way" to train horses in the horse community.
Mr. Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have no bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. The owners most likely paid the same price for training as did the owners of other horses in Mr. Wells' barn that are worth more money. Therefore, they and their horses deserve to receive the same treatment and results as other horses and owners receive at Mr. Wells' barn.
I ask that you reconsider the case against Mr. Wells for the abuse Slow Lopin Scotch endured. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished shows that the abuse of animals in your county and under your jurisdiction is considered acceptable. It also shows those working for the County in the Animal Control Division that although they do their jobs and try to bring justice to those who abuse, they will not be taken seriously if and when the abuser is reprimanded or taken into custody.
If this case is not taken any further and Mr. Wells receives no punishment for his abusive actions or his careless inaction to get proper care for the horse, i.e., calling the veterinarian, this is what the country will perceive, as many eyes are on you. Horse people across the country are watching and hoping for justice to finally be done. This is but one step in a long uphill battle.
If you have any questions or concerns, or would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below information. Thank you for your time.
I hope this information is helpful and gives you insight and guidance in how to write your own letters. If you'd like me to critique your letter, please email me via my website (linked at the bottom of this blog). Please note that I may not necessarily write you back right away, but I will get to your email as soon as I can.
Good luck in helping those who cannot help themselves, whether it be human or animal. We can only make a difference if we stand up for what is right!
My friend's letter is in blue text; my comments are in red text.
To the office of
District Attorney
Honorable Dale Hanna
Phone (817) 556-6802
Fax (817) 556-6816
Guinn Justice Center
204 S. Buffalo Ave Room 209
Cleburne, Texas 76033
Re: SLOW LOPIN SCOTCH It would probably be better if your reason for the letter was Cleve Wells, or the actual case number, if you can find it. They most likely won't remember the horse's name (unfortunately).
It has recently come to my attention that the district attorneys office has chosen a discretionary rejection concerning the case against Mr. Cleve Wells for his role in the abuse of a horse under his care named Slow Lopin Scotch.
All I can do is shake my head in amazement and wonder why and how this ever could have happened? use a period here instead of a ? It has been stated that your office has received a large amount of correspondence concerning Mr. Wells and his abusive habits which he calls horse training. I should also hope you have read a good number of first hand accounts of the actions of Mr. Wells. I can assure you that there is absolutely NO reason on earth a horse should suffer the injuries to the extent of those displayed in the pictures of Slow Lopin Scotch, nor the sheer torture he surely endured. NONE whatsoever! Delete this last sentence. Dramatic language such as this is ignored and it can reflect bad on you. Take out all capital letter words as well.
From what I understand the discretionary rejection was chosen due in part to many of the occurrences you learned of, happening outside of your jurisdiction. If this is true, did you not consider that this ONE case is YOUR chance to STOP someone who obviously has no regard for animals? Turn this into a sentence rather than a question. This is a very derogatory question toward the DA--if I were him, I'd drop your letter right now and not read the rest. You want to approach him with facts, not be accusatory. Accusations only piss people off. If the other occurrences happened in places outside of your jurisdiction, that should tell you in no uncertain terms, Mr. Wells behaves in this same ruthless, uncaring and callous manner while he is away at horse shows and most likely while IN the public eye. If he behaves this badly and is this abusive to animals in public, there is no telling what happens to them at ‘home’ on his property and behind his barn doors.
It has also been stated that Mr. Wells claims one of his employees is at fault for the injuries suffered by Slow Lopin Scotch. Again, let me assure you, take "let me assure you" out--another accusatory statement, as if you know more than him. Okay, of course you do, but you don't want to question his job as the DA. whether the injuries came from the abusive hands of Mr. Wells or one of his employees, the horse was indeed AT his facility, ON his property and UNDER the care, custody and control of Mr. Wells. Therefore Mr. Wells is ultimately responsible for the well being of the horse. Again, take out the capital letters. He'll get it whether the words are capitalized or not.
The horses’ well being while at a training facility is similar to dropping your children off at school. While on school grounds it is the responsibility of the school faculty and staff under the guidance of the principal, to provide your child with a safe learning environment. It is the same responsibility of the facility owner and/or manager to ensure each horse is safe and cared for while they are on their property and under their care. Delete this whole paragraph. There are people who would not believe this to be true, so it's not a very good comparison. Most people do not equate animals as being as important as children--they are livestock or product.
My husband and I train horses and we have never, never had to abuse an animal in any manner, way, shape or form, to get them to perform. To carry that one step further, our horses perform much more difficult work- cutting as per NCHA, and jumping, which is far more difficult than merely performing three gaits (walk, jog and lope) around an arena. Might I also add that abused horses will just not ‘try’ as hard to please as those treated fairly with kindness, patience and respect. Okay, this is a hard one. Most people, and most likely this DA, aren't going to know what "gaits," "cutting," "NCHA," "lope," or even "arena" means. I believe it's important for you to point out that you are horse trainers and you have been more successful with kindness, patience and respect rather than abusing a horse. But put it in terms a layman would know. Point out the successes of people like Clinton Anderson, the Parellis, and Monty Roberts. Give an example of a horse that came to you abused, and your methods changed that horse's attitude.
Mr. Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have absolutely NO bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. NONE! Remove "NONE!" and take out the capital letters. The horse may have been able to perform to the top levels of the ‘sport’ of showing Mr. Wells aspires to, but following the abuse and torture this horse endured, the mental capacities of Slow Lopin Scotch may never be able to handle even ‘normal’ day to day care, without the long term effects of Mr. Wells’ abuse resurfacing time and again. Again, we're dealing with someone who probably has no sympathy for horses. So I would change this paragraph to read as follows:
Mr... Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have no bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. The owners most likely paid the same price for training as did other horses in Mr. Wells' barn that are worth more money. Therefore, they deserve to receive the same treatment and results as other horse owners receive at Mr. Wells' barn.
I ask that you reconsider the case against Mr. Wells for the abuse Slow Lopin Scotch endured. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished, just shows that the abuse of animals in your county and under your jurisdiction is considered acceptable. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished also shows those working for the county in the animal control division that although they do their jobs and try to bring justice to those who abuse, they will not be taken seriously if and when the abuser is reprimanded or taken into custody. EXCELLENT paragraph!
If this case is not taken any further and Mr. Wells receives no punishment for his abusive actions or his careless inaction to get proper care for the horse, i.e. calling the veterinarian, this is what the country will perceive, as many eyes are on you. Horse people across the country are watching and hoping for justice to finally be done. This is but one step in a long uphill battle. Way to stick it to him--hitting them where it hurts, which includes their reputation and their pocketbook, is very wise. You can also find out when the next election is and point out that he can lose votes, things like that.
I ask that you take a long hard look at each picture submitted of Slow Lopin Scotch and his injuries and imagine for a moment it were you. Imagine that you had open lacerations left untreated, open and likely infected wounds oozing pus and foul odors that you had to smell constantly. Imagine that you are the one with bone fragments in your jaw causing undetermined amounts of pain as you try to eat. Take this paragraph out. Many, many people don't view animals as having feelings and won't put themselves in their shoes/paws. Plus, if this guy dismissed the case, then he obviously doesn't care much about the feelings of animals.
I ask you again to reconsider the case against Mr. Wells. If for nobody else, reconsider it for Slow Lopin Scotch and the number of other horses who will surely suffer the same torture, should Cleve Wells go unpunished. Again, he won't care about the horse, so remove this paragraph. Ending your letter with a dig at what his decision will reflect leaves him with something very strong to think about.
Thank You,
Name
Business Name
Address
Phone
Here's the same letter that has all the above changes that I've made. (Red + Blue = Purple!)
It has recently come to my attention that the district attorneys office has chosen a discretionary rejection concerning the case against Mr. Cleve Wells for his role in the abuse of a horse under his care named Slow Lopin Scotch.
All I can do is shake my head in amazement and wonder why and how this ever could have happened. It has been stated that your office has received a large amount of correspondence concerning Mr. Wells and his abusive habits which he calls horse training. I should also hope you have read a good number of first hand accounts of the actions of Mr. Wells.
From what I understand the discretionary rejection was chosen due in part to many of the occurrences you learned of happening outside of your jurisdiction. If this is true, then this opportunity to stop someone who obviously has no regard for animals has been completely passed by. If the other occurrences happened in places outside of your jurisdiction, that should communitcate that, in no uncertain terms, Mr. Wells behaves in this same ruthless, uncaring and callous manner while he is away at horse shows and most likely while in the public eye. If he behaves this badly and is this abusive to animals in public, there is no telling what happens to them at ‘home’ on his property and behind his barn doors.
It has also been stated that Mr. Wells claims one of his employees is at fault for the injuries suffered by Slow Lopin Scotch. Again, whether the injuries came from the abusive hands of Mr. Wells or one of his employees, the horse was indeed at his facility, physically on his property and therefore under the care, custody and control of Mr. Wells. Therefore, Mr. Wells is ultimately responsible for the well being of the horse.
My husband and I train horses and we have never had to resort to methods that cause injuries to an animal in any manner, way, shape, or form to get them to perform. As horse trainers, we have been far more successful with kidness, patience and respect rather than resorting to the kinds of abusive methods Mr. Wells used on Slow Lopin Scotch. This success is not just prevalent in our personal business; dozens of public figures that are considered high quality horse trainers such as Monty Roberts, Clinton Anderson, Pat and Linda Parelli, and Dennis Reis use positive reinforcement and not in punishment in their day-to-day training, and that message is strong and widely accepted as the "right way" to train horses in the horse community.
Mr. Wells has also stated the value of Slow Lopin Scotch is not as high as the other horses in his barn. Dollar value should have no bearing on how a horse is handled, treated or cared for. The owners most likely paid the same price for training as did the owners of other horses in Mr. Wells' barn that are worth more money. Therefore, they and their horses deserve to receive the same treatment and results as other horses and owners receive at Mr. Wells' barn.
I ask that you reconsider the case against Mr. Wells for the abuse Slow Lopin Scotch endured. For Mr. Wells to go unpunished shows that the abuse of animals in your county and under your jurisdiction is considered acceptable. It also shows those working for the County in the Animal Control Division that although they do their jobs and try to bring justice to those who abuse, they will not be taken seriously if and when the abuser is reprimanded or taken into custody.
If this case is not taken any further and Mr. Wells receives no punishment for his abusive actions or his careless inaction to get proper care for the horse, i.e., calling the veterinarian, this is what the country will perceive, as many eyes are on you. Horse people across the country are watching and hoping for justice to finally be done. This is but one step in a long uphill battle.
If you have any questions or concerns, or would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below information. Thank you for your time.
I hope this information is helpful and gives you insight and guidance in how to write your own letters. If you'd like me to critique your letter, please email me via my website (linked at the bottom of this blog). Please note that I may not necessarily write you back right away, but I will get to your email as soon as I can.
Good luck in helping those who cannot help themselves, whether it be human or animal. We can only make a difference if we stand up for what is right!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)