THIS IS SERIOUS -- Contact Your Legislator
I have been worried about this issue for some time now, and it is about to happen. If this change in the property tax law takes place, many of us will be out of business, and maybe out of our homes as well. Please act. This is from the TTA Executive Director's news letter.
HOUSE BILL 2328 THREATENS AG EXEMPTION, TAX INCENTIVES FOR HORSE OWNERS
As if owning and breeding horses in Texas were not expensive enough, another threat to that livelihood could arise if House Bill 2328 or companion Senate Bill 1100 becomes law. The bills, which stiffen penalties against animal cruelty, also include a provision to reclassify horses as non-livestock companion animals. In doing so, horse farms, owners, breeders, trainers, etc., would lose their agricultural exemption and tax advantages.
While the Texas Thoroughbred Association agrees with the need for more severe penalties for animal cruelty, the loss of livestock classification for horses would be another large financial blow to horse owners and breeders already suffering from the lack of parity with VLT-fueled purses in surrounding states. HB 2328 will be discussed in the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on Tuesday, March 20, at 2pm. The TTA urges members to attend the meeting if possible or contact their legislators to voice their opposition to the reclassification of horses as non- livestock in HB 2328.
Vicke
Email: [email protected]
Sprite
Mar 17th, 2007 - 8:30 PM Re: THIS IS SERIOUS -- Contact Your Legislator
Vicke,
So glad you made this post. Several concerned horsemen have made the suggestion that it is high time to push for safe bridle and horse-driving paths in rural areas across the state of Texas. With the high price of fuel, increasing American dependence on foreign oil, and the public concern for the environment (as evidenced by President Bush's recently stated acceptance of Global Warming as a trend), rural horsemen should be provided safe paths (protected from motor vehicle traffic) to use their horses as transportation to towns and communities within riding distance.
This effort would effectively extinguish any effort to designate horses as companion animals and remind our state government that Texas is not fertile ground for their Calvanistic efforts to create a cookie cutter carbon copy Texan who is just like all the suburbanite Texas residents who live in cities and sit in traffic for hours every morning, commuting to their cubicles for less money than it takes to buy the gasoline to get there; from the home that costs more in rent or housenote than they can earn.
The important thing to understand here is that horsemen must push back. If we don't, it will be the easiest thing in the world for our legislators and Rick Perry to push us out of our farms and ranches. Out of our agricultural businesses. Out of our lifestyle of rugged individualism. Texas is Texas. We should not let them turn our state and our lifestyles into something we as individuals might not choose for ourselves.
www.texashorsemen.org
From The Texas Horsemen's forum.
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
Chuck,
Awesome! Glad you made the calls. I think they really do make some difference. Let's face it, people may call all the time, but I don't think they do.
I know another horsemen's group in the state is trying to get safe riding paths along railroad right of ways for horses. I intend to contact them. I also intend to contact the people who succeeded in getting bike lanes put in on major Texas roads. They probably will have some good advice or suggestions.
Awesome! Glad you made the calls. I think they really do make some difference. Let's face it, people may call all the time, but I don't think they do.
I know another horsemen's group in the state is trying to get safe riding paths along railroad right of ways for horses. I intend to contact them. I also intend to contact the people who succeeded in getting bike lanes put in on major Texas roads. They probably will have some good advice or suggestions.
Madelyn,
I was surprised to find out that Kentucky does not provide an agricultural tax benefit for horses. With the importance of horses to them, I had expected more business incentives in your state. I expected Kentucky to be more like Ireland than Texas. Lately, it seems like Texas wants to encourage every business in the world, except horses.
My back up plan is to continue to raise a few goats, which will still qualify my land as agricultural. You can even sell them when you want to.
Bedouwia
I was surprised to find out that Kentucky does not provide an agricultural tax benefit for horses. With the importance of horses to them, I had expected more business incentives in your state. I expected Kentucky to be more like Ireland than Texas. Lately, it seems like Texas wants to encourage every business in the world, except horses.
My back up plan is to continue to raise a few goats, which will still qualify my land as agricultural. You can even sell them when you want to.
Bedouwia
-
summerhorse
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:40 am
- Location: Panama City, FL
- Contact:
Almost every farm I know runs cattle to get the ag exemption. I wonder how many states DO allow the exemption? It seems a relic of the past and is part of the problem with people breeding for the slaughter market. they breed a bunch of horses to get their exemption knowing they can ship them off to slaughter every year. Why not just run a few cows?
Every mighty oak was once an acorn that stood its ground.
I have been looking into getting a couple of mini cows to breed every year (AI) and run with my mares to get the exemption. Of course first I would have to fortify the fences and then there is my husband to get that past. 
Here are some interesting things I have found out from a pal who has a LOT of cows and also quite a number of Thoroughbreds. Cows don't take anywhere nearly as much food as horses (especially Thoroughbreds). Since the parasites are species specific, there is no worry about putting the cows in the same pastures as the mares. The "new" mini cows, also called freezer cows because one entire one fits in a freezer, are much easier to handle. Another friend of mine said only buy black ones. Cows with a lot of white are prone to sunburn and skin infections. The minis only weigh 600-800 lbs. Breeding stock heifers are pricey but figure $3000 a year or so in tax savings, plus maybe 500 lbs of meat.
There have been a few political rumblings about a horse exemption in KY but I think that is just a vote-getter that is one of those things. You can say you WILL do something like that if elected, but how many election promises ever are kept?
Here are some interesting things I have found out from a pal who has a LOT of cows and also quite a number of Thoroughbreds. Cows don't take anywhere nearly as much food as horses (especially Thoroughbreds). Since the parasites are species specific, there is no worry about putting the cows in the same pastures as the mares. The "new" mini cows, also called freezer cows because one entire one fits in a freezer, are much easier to handle. Another friend of mine said only buy black ones. Cows with a lot of white are prone to sunburn and skin infections. The minis only weigh 600-800 lbs. Breeding stock heifers are pricey but figure $3000 a year or so in tax savings, plus maybe 500 lbs of meat.
There have been a few political rumblings about a horse exemption in KY but I think that is just a vote-getter that is one of those things. You can say you WILL do something like that if elected, but how many election promises ever are kept?
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can.....
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
I'm glad to see that everyone is sharing their thoughts on these issues. I really believe it's important that horsemen discuss things and that we know what is going on around the country in the industry.
We've been looking at some of the maps of pipeline easements, rail-road easements, power line easements, and it has been pointed out that safe, clear paths already exist across the country leading to and through every community, town, and even cities in the U.S. If these were opened up to horse traffic, it could easily be possible to safely ride almost anywhere in the country without having to ride down any major roads. Some fencing, caution signs, and bridges would have to be built. But I think this is so doable, it would be a crime if it never happened. The global warming guys are happy to see the prices of fuel skyrocketing, because they think it will mean fewer people driving cars and causing pollution. They figure we will all walk or ride bicycles, like they do in Japan. The oil companies are happy because they figure people will keep on driving everywhere they go no matter how high the price goes.
If I had safe paths, I would ride nearly everywhere I go, including driving a cart to the feedstore to load up feed. When I realized all the short trips I make, I really was surprised at how little I would actually need to use my truck if they just took down the gates off the pipeline easement that goes on one side of my farm. Insteresting stuff!
We've been looking at some of the maps of pipeline easements, rail-road easements, power line easements, and it has been pointed out that safe, clear paths already exist across the country leading to and through every community, town, and even cities in the U.S. If these were opened up to horse traffic, it could easily be possible to safely ride almost anywhere in the country without having to ride down any major roads. Some fencing, caution signs, and bridges would have to be built. But I think this is so doable, it would be a crime if it never happened. The global warming guys are happy to see the prices of fuel skyrocketing, because they think it will mean fewer people driving cars and causing pollution. They figure we will all walk or ride bicycles, like they do in Japan. The oil companies are happy because they figure people will keep on driving everywhere they go no matter how high the price goes.
If I had safe paths, I would ride nearly everywhere I go, including driving a cart to the feedstore to load up feed. When I realized all the short trips I make, I really was surprised at how little I would actually need to use my truck if they just took down the gates off the pipeline easement that goes on one side of my farm. Insteresting stuff!
-
SymRanch
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:56 pm
- Location: TX, NY and PA
- Contact:
I checked with a friend, who is a specialist in equine law in texas. Her response certain differs from much of what has been posted so far:
"THE RUMOR ABOUT HB 2328 HORSE/LIVESTOCK DESIGNATION AFFECTING YOUR
AGRICULTURE EXEMPTION IS COMPLETELY INACCURATE!.
Having been intimately involved with this issue, please let me clarify the
truth of the matter:
The Bill (HB 2328) seeks to have horses removed from the Livestock exception
to Section 4209 of the Texas Penal Code (the animal cruelty statute) for the
FOR PURPOSES OF INTENTIONAL ANIMAL CRUELTY ONLY!
The animals listed in the livestock exception to the cruelty statute are
animals raised for food, which have accepted standard livestock practices by
the agriculture community. Horses have never been raised as food animals in
this country, although France, parts of Canada & the Orient import horsemeat
for human consumption.
Currently, it is NOT against the law to intentionally kill or injure a
horse. Such as someone coming onto your property & cutting your horse's
throat, stabbing it, or hitting it with a sledgehammer, as occurred recently
in College Station. The perpetrator can potentially be prosecuted on only
the much lesser offenses of criminal trespass and malicious mischief.
Removing horses from the livestock exception to the cruelty statute has no
affect on the other animals who fit under the livestock exception to the
cruelty statute whereby, it is not a criminal offence to kill or injure
pigs, cows, goats, sheep, and fowl, as standard livestock practices,
although torture is prohibited.
Further, the removal of horses from the livestock exception to the cruelty
statute affects ONLY their designation relative to intentional animal
cruelty under Section 4209. IT HAS NO AFFECT ON HORSES AS LIVESTOCK FOR
PROPERTY TAX AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION, SHIPMENT, TRANSPORT, SALE, VALUATION,
ANIMAL FEED OR, IN ANY OTHER WAY!
HB 2328 is an Anti-cruelty bill, introduced by Beverly Woolley (R-Dist.136)
and is a VERY GOOD BILL and SHOULD BE SUPPORTED!
Please also support the Senate Companion Bill SB 1100 sponsored by Sen. John
Whitmire (D-Dist.15)"
"THE RUMOR ABOUT HB 2328 HORSE/LIVESTOCK DESIGNATION AFFECTING YOUR
AGRICULTURE EXEMPTION IS COMPLETELY INACCURATE!.
Having been intimately involved with this issue, please let me clarify the
truth of the matter:
The Bill (HB 2328) seeks to have horses removed from the Livestock exception
to Section 4209 of the Texas Penal Code (the animal cruelty statute) for the
FOR PURPOSES OF INTENTIONAL ANIMAL CRUELTY ONLY!
The animals listed in the livestock exception to the cruelty statute are
animals raised for food, which have accepted standard livestock practices by
the agriculture community. Horses have never been raised as food animals in
this country, although France, parts of Canada & the Orient import horsemeat
for human consumption.
Currently, it is NOT against the law to intentionally kill or injure a
horse. Such as someone coming onto your property & cutting your horse's
throat, stabbing it, or hitting it with a sledgehammer, as occurred recently
in College Station. The perpetrator can potentially be prosecuted on only
the much lesser offenses of criminal trespass and malicious mischief.
Removing horses from the livestock exception to the cruelty statute has no
affect on the other animals who fit under the livestock exception to the
cruelty statute whereby, it is not a criminal offence to kill or injure
pigs, cows, goats, sheep, and fowl, as standard livestock practices,
although torture is prohibited.
Further, the removal of horses from the livestock exception to the cruelty
statute affects ONLY their designation relative to intentional animal
cruelty under Section 4209. IT HAS NO AFFECT ON HORSES AS LIVESTOCK FOR
PROPERTY TAX AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION, SHIPMENT, TRANSPORT, SALE, VALUATION,
ANIMAL FEED OR, IN ANY OTHER WAY!
HB 2328 is an Anti-cruelty bill, introduced by Beverly Woolley (R-Dist.136)
and is a VERY GOOD BILL and SHOULD BE SUPPORTED!
Please also support the Senate Companion Bill SB 1100 sponsored by Sen. John
Whitmire (D-Dist.15)"
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
Sym,
I can't speak for other posters. I can tell you that the reason horses get any livestock exemptions at all is because they are considered utility animals in the production of beef. There are still a few cow horses left in Texas, though not like in the cowboy days. Plus, horses are sold to foreign countries for food. So, that's part of their qualification, but it was not granted originally because of that business.
Anytime a lawyer or politician tells you what a law is intended to do, just know that there are many personal agendas behind the scenes. You can believe everything everyone tells you if you like. I've had too much experience with "unintended consequences" of legislation to say, "Oh, well, that's alright then. I won't worry about it."
Essentially, I believe the proponents of the bill want to help close the slaughter plants in Texas by designating horses as companions. Once horses are designated as companions, exactly who will decide what is "cruelty"? I know the Humane Society thinks racing horses is "cruely"?
There is a reason all the anti-horse laws pass without any problem in this state. It's not because there aren't horse owners here. It's because horse owners tend to think those laws only apply to someone else.
The dog clubs go out in force and stop things like this before it ever gets this far. Horse owners have never bothered to do anything like that, mainly because they can't seem to agree on anything.
And I'm getting that there isn't a soul here who is interested in riding a horse anywhere, so I'll just quit talking about it and let the thread die. I've always enjoyed riding myself, and for many years, my palomino Sunny was my primary means of transportation. Now, it's Tinker.
I can't speak for other posters. I can tell you that the reason horses get any livestock exemptions at all is because they are considered utility animals in the production of beef. There are still a few cow horses left in Texas, though not like in the cowboy days. Plus, horses are sold to foreign countries for food. So, that's part of their qualification, but it was not granted originally because of that business.
Anytime a lawyer or politician tells you what a law is intended to do, just know that there are many personal agendas behind the scenes. You can believe everything everyone tells you if you like. I've had too much experience with "unintended consequences" of legislation to say, "Oh, well, that's alright then. I won't worry about it."
Essentially, I believe the proponents of the bill want to help close the slaughter plants in Texas by designating horses as companions. Once horses are designated as companions, exactly who will decide what is "cruelty"? I know the Humane Society thinks racing horses is "cruely"?
There is a reason all the anti-horse laws pass without any problem in this state. It's not because there aren't horse owners here. It's because horse owners tend to think those laws only apply to someone else.
The dog clubs go out in force and stop things like this before it ever gets this far. Horse owners have never bothered to do anything like that, mainly because they can't seem to agree on anything.
And I'm getting that there isn't a soul here who is interested in riding a horse anywhere, so I'll just quit talking about it and let the thread die. I've always enjoyed riding myself, and for many years, my palomino Sunny was my primary means of transportation. Now, it's Tinker.
Well, we seem to have two issues here.
SymRanch, I hope your friend is correct. No one supports cruelty toward horses. That part of the bill is great. However, they need an amendment to clear up the property tax issue. Without it, you can expect the tax collectors to jump all over this.
Angelsprite, sadly, only 10% of Texans still live in rural areas. Many of them do not ride any more. Your best help would come from the riding clubs, etc. who really are finding it harder and harder to find good safe places to enjoy their horses. As you note, the trails are there. Why not use them? However, it will not satisfy the tax people, trust me. If they spot a new source of revenue, they will jump all over it.
I find it sad that around the country the production of horses is not considered an agricultural endeavor. I would rather raise miniature horses than miniature cows. Thank goodness, I already have a few goats. I suppose we will survive this as well. Just one more obstacle in our way.
Bedouwia
SymRanch, I hope your friend is correct. No one supports cruelty toward horses. That part of the bill is great. However, they need an amendment to clear up the property tax issue. Without it, you can expect the tax collectors to jump all over this.
Angelsprite, sadly, only 10% of Texans still live in rural areas. Many of them do not ride any more. Your best help would come from the riding clubs, etc. who really are finding it harder and harder to find good safe places to enjoy their horses. As you note, the trails are there. Why not use them? However, it will not satisfy the tax people, trust me. If they spot a new source of revenue, they will jump all over it.
I find it sad that around the country the production of horses is not considered an agricultural endeavor. I would rather raise miniature horses than miniature cows. Thank goodness, I already have a few goats. I suppose we will survive this as well. Just one more obstacle in our way.
Bedouwia
SymRanch
I have serious problems with making such a massive change to the laws because of a single horrific incident by a idiotic college student. The act was illegal. On the surface, what you are trying to change is what you call the act (animal cruelty vs. criminal mischief) and perhaps what the penalty is or should be.
Animal cruelty laws are being used in horse cases in Texas to address problems with some regularity. Recently reported in the Fort Worth Star Telegram were several cases in Parker County where malnourished animals were seized and the owner prosecuted under current statutes. Another high profile case last year involved a Southlake doctor who was convicted twice for animal cruelty as a result of the mistreatment of horses.
That being said I decided to go to http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80 ... 02328I.htm and review the proposed legislation. It seems there is a lot of hyperbole and misinformation from both sides on this issue. In my opinion the proposed bill does not change the definition of a horse as livestock. In fact it specifically defines horses as livestock:
(4) "Livestock animal" means:
(A) cattle, sheep, swine, goats, or fowl commonly
raised for human consumption; or
(B) a horse, pony, mule, donkey, or hinny.
It seems to extend certain protections to all livestock, for example:
old - (9) injures an animal, other than
cattle, horses, sheep, swine, or goats, belonging to another
without legal authority or the owner's effective consent
new - (8) injures a livestock animal belonging to another
without legal authority or the owner's effective consent
With this much misinformation being promoted by both sides of the issue I think there is more to this debate than is apparent on the surface. The original poster referenced a communication by the TTA (Texas Thoroughbred Association). I have referenced my comments and sources. SymRanch, what is the source of your information? You provided an opinion piece from a "friend" that was well thought out and well written. In order to judge the motives and the purpose of this communication I would like to know the source.
I suspect in some way this argument is in fact about horse slaughter. But I am not sure how making this change will effect things. My personal feeling about horse slaughter is similar to my feeling about abortion. Both are distasteful, but under some circumstances necessary.
Best regards
Chuck
I have serious problems with making such a massive change to the laws because of a single horrific incident by a idiotic college student. The act was illegal. On the surface, what you are trying to change is what you call the act (animal cruelty vs. criminal mischief) and perhaps what the penalty is or should be.
Animal cruelty laws are being used in horse cases in Texas to address problems with some regularity. Recently reported in the Fort Worth Star Telegram were several cases in Parker County where malnourished animals were seized and the owner prosecuted under current statutes. Another high profile case last year involved a Southlake doctor who was convicted twice for animal cruelty as a result of the mistreatment of horses.
That being said I decided to go to http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80 ... 02328I.htm and review the proposed legislation. It seems there is a lot of hyperbole and misinformation from both sides on this issue. In my opinion the proposed bill does not change the definition of a horse as livestock. In fact it specifically defines horses as livestock:
(4) "Livestock animal" means:
(A) cattle, sheep, swine, goats, or fowl commonly
raised for human consumption; or
(B) a horse, pony, mule, donkey, or hinny.
It seems to extend certain protections to all livestock, for example:
old - (9) injures an animal, other than
cattle, horses, sheep, swine, or goats, belonging to another
without legal authority or the owner's effective consent
new - (8) injures a livestock animal belonging to another
without legal authority or the owner's effective consent
With this much misinformation being promoted by both sides of the issue I think there is more to this debate than is apparent on the surface. The original poster referenced a communication by the TTA (Texas Thoroughbred Association). I have referenced my comments and sources. SymRanch, what is the source of your information? You provided an opinion piece from a "friend" that was well thought out and well written. In order to judge the motives and the purpose of this communication I would like to know the source.
I suspect in some way this argument is in fact about horse slaughter. But I am not sure how making this change will effect things. My personal feeling about horse slaughter is similar to my feeling about abortion. Both are distasteful, but under some circumstances necessary.
Best regards
Chuck
-
SymRanch
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:56 pm
- Location: TX, NY and PA
- Contact:
cewright wrote:SymRanch
The original poster referenced a communication by the TTA (Texas Thoroughbred Association). I have referenced my comments and sources. SymRanch, what is the source of your information? You provided an opinion piece from a "friend" that was well thought out and well written. In order to judge the motives and the purpose of this communication I would like to know the source.
I don't think she'll mind the reference. The quote was from an email I received from Dawn E. Reveley. She's an attorney in Texas, and an avid equestrian. Her background is on her website: http://www.ushorses.org/experience.php
I generally DON'T believe everything I'm told.... but this is Dawn's area of specialization, and I know her personal so am confident in her intentions and motivations.
As such, I thought it was worth mentioning that there are more sides to this issue than presented in the original post.