The changing parameter concerning horses is whether the horse is considered to be an agricultural animal or a domestic (i.e. companion) animal. South Carolina wants to limit the number of horses an owner can posses and Florida wants to relegate any and all health issues to licensed veterinarians only.
In my opinion both bills are poorly written, difficult to enforce, and infringe upon the rights of horse owners. I also believe they are unnecessary because other legislation provides adequate protection if enforced
Let's start with my home state of South Carolina. The complete bill can be read at http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003... This bill would make it illegal for a person to possess more than fifty companion animals. Companion animal is described as a horse, dog, cat or any other animal considered a pet. Pet is defined as any animal that is domesticated and kept for companionship rather than utility.
There is a whole host of questions this bill does not address. How much work does a horse have to produce to be considered a utility? Run races? Pull carriages? Compete at shows? How many shows per year would qualify a horse to be considered productive and not just companion? What about breeding farms? Would having 26 mares with foals at their sides be illegal? What is the definition of possessing? If I run a boarding facility of over 50 horses that are individually owned, but on my property would I be in contempt of the law?
But the biggest question is what benefit is this law supposed to provide? The current laws already make it illegal to "overload, overdrive, overwork, ill-treat any animal, deprive any animal of necessary sustenance [including veterinary care] or shelter, inflict unnecessary pain or suffering upon any animal, or by omission or commission knowingly or intentionally causes these things to be done..." What difference does it make if these infractions are made on one horse or fifty? If an owner has more than fifty horses and all are well cared for how are the horses' (or any other animal's) welfare better served by this law?
Nothing signifies the stupidity of this law better than the name of the violation: "A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of the misdemeanor of companion animal hoarding..." One of the penalties for committing such a heinous deed is equally absurd: "The court shall order a psychological evaluation of a person convicted of companion animal hoarding." Not so funny is the fact that all court-ordered psychological counseling will be at the expense of the convicted person. So watch out all you horse crazy people in South Carolina.
