Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Equine Vets and Controlled Substances

MHC Executive Committee Member (soon to be MHC VP) and equine vet Dr. Peter Radue recently received this letter from The American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP).  Under current federal law, it is illegal for any veterinarian to use controlled substances away from his/her licensed premises. This means that technically, vets are prohibited from carrying and using medications for pain management and euthanasia, if necessary, at your farm or stable. Although the law has not previously enforced, DEA has recently warned vets in California and Washington state that they are in violation. If you believe that equine and other mobile vets should be able to carry controlled substances in their trucks please contact your congressman using the link below.  If vets are unable to carry controlled substances they will be unable to address emergency situations requiring pain relief or euthanasia.

Dear Dr. Radue:
The AAEP Welfare and Public Policy Advisory Council is working with the AVMA and Congress to ensure that veterinarians can provide complete care to their animal patients.  With the recent introduction of the Veterinary Medicine Mobility Act of 2013 (H.R. 1528) we have the opportunity to make an impact.
As large animal veterinarians, most of us have frequent need to use controlled substances to treat our patients at the stables, ranches, farms and other sites where they live.  However, the provisions of the existing Controlled Substances Act
  (CSA) make it illegal for any veterinarian to transport and/or use controlled substances outside of the DEA license location that is registered for that individual. This means that it is currently illegal for veterinarians to carry and use these vital medications for pain management, anesthesia or euthanasia on farms, at house calls, in veterinary mobile clinics, or in ambulatory response situations.
Veterinarians must be able to legally carry and use controlled substances for the health and welfare of the nation’s animals, to safeguard public safety and to protect the nation’s food supply.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which enforces the law, has informed organized veterinary medicine that without a statutory change, many veterinarians are in violation of the CSA and cannot legally administer controlled substances away from their registry site. The DEA has already notified some veterinarians in California and Washington State that they are in violation of this law.
We encourage you to contact your members of Congress and urge them to support the Veterinary Medicine Mobility Act of 2013 (H.R. 1528). This act would amend the CSA that currently prohibits veterinarians from transporting controlled substances to treat their animal patients outside of their registered locations.
Please join us in telling Congress that veterinarians need to be able to transport controlled substances to the locations of their animal patients, not only for the health and welfare of the nation’s animals, but for public safety.
The link below takes you to the AVMA Legislative Action Center where you can easily express your support of H.R. 1528.  Contact information for your representative(s) is generated  automatically by your zip code and a message which you may edit is provided.
Take Action!
 Thank you for your advocacy.
Sincerely,
Ann E, Dwyer, DVM
2013 AAEP President

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

INFORMATION ON RECENT BOWIE RACE COURSE TRAINING CENTER LEGISLATION


INFORMATION ON RECENT BOWIE RACE COURSE TRAINING CENTER LEGISLATION

Executive Summary
Current Maryland State law requires the Bowie Race Course Training Facility to operate as a thoroughbred training facility.  Numerous attempts have been made in the past few years to repeal that law, but none have passed.  Current State statute also states that when the facility is no longer required for thoroughbred training, the State will have first right of refusal for the property, followed by the City of Bowie.  The current law will have to be repealed in order to stop thoroughbred training at Bowie, which can not happen until the next legislative session.

Background
1.      Current State statute 11-519 requires Bowie to operate as a thoroughbred training facility.  That statute has not been repealed, although Senator Peters' bill in 2013, and Senator Peters' and Delegates Hubbard’s and Valentino-Smith’s bills in 2011 attempted to do so.  None of those bills repealing the statute have passed.  Under current statute, Bowie will have to continue as a thoroughbred training facility at least through the next legislative session when another attempt to repeal the statute could be introduced.

Statute Text:
“Article - Business Regulation §11–519.
(a) The owner of the Bowie Race Course Training Center shall operate the Center as a thoroughbred training facility to provide more stall space for a race meeting that a licensee holds.
(b) The owner of the Bowie Race Course Training Center is responsible for the cost to improve, maintain, and operate the Center.
(c) As long as the Bowie Race Course Training Center is used for the purpose specified in subsection (a) of this section, the Commission shall have general regulatory jurisdiction over the Center to:
(1) provide enough stalls;
(2) maintain safe operating conditions;
(3) require the owner of the Center to submit an annual operating financial statement; and
(4) order reasonable improvements.”

Stature 11-519 requiring Bowie to operate as a thoroughbred training facility has not been repealed in legislation as of this date.

2.      Below is a summary of the recent proposed legislation to convey the Bowie Race Course Training Center to state, county, and City of Bowie and to repeal the statute to operate Bowie as a Thoroughbred training facility.

2013
Bowie Race Course legislation included in Sen Peters’ original Senate bill SB961 -
 Horse Racing – Special Takeout and Bowie Race Course Training Center
Pertinent language:

“… repealing certain requirements that a certain racing licensee maintain the operation of the Center….

 …BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments, 
Article – Business Regulation
Section 11–514 and 11–519
Annotated Code of Maryland
(2010 Replacement Volume and 2012 Supplement)…
…(4) ON CONVEYANCE, THE CITY OF BOWIE MAY NOT BE REQUIRED TO OPERATE THE BOWIE RACE COURSE TRAINING CENTER AS A THOROUGHBRED TRAINING FACILITY FOR ANY PURPOSE….

(Bowie portion, including 11-519 repeal, removed from SB961in amendment and passed in Senate and House and signed into law April 9, 2013.)

2012
Bowie property conveyance and language referring to required operation included in an amendment to proposed legislation for SB152 -  Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2012 (Amendment attached, not linked- see pages 5 and 6).
Note:  Full SB152 and amendment did not include 11-519 repeal as other legislation had; alternate language in section (4)(ii)1 below.
“(4) (i) A racing licensee of a racetrack location at Laurel Park shall:
1. maintain the operation of the Bowie Training Center;
 2. convey the property associated with the Bowie Training Center as preserved land.
(ii) 1. When the Bowie Training Center is no longer required by the State to be operated as a thoroughbred training facility, the State shall have the right of first refusal as grantee for any conveyance under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.
2. The City of Bowie shall have the second right of refusal as grantee for any conveyance under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.
3. A grantee under subsubparagraph 1 or 2 of this subparagraph may not be required to operate the Bowie Training Center as a training facility.”

 (Did not pass)

2011
Sen Peters’ 2011 Senate bill SB491 -  Authorizing the owner of the Bowie Race Course Training Center to convey the property associated with the training center to the State, Prince George's County, or the City of Bowie; and providing for the construction of specified provisions of law.” Included repeal of 11-519.
Del Hubbard and Del Valentino-Smith’s 2011 House bill – HB557 -  “Authorizing the owner of the Bowie Race Course Training Center to convey the property associated with the training center to the State as preserved land under Program Open Space.”  Included repeal of 11-519.
(Neither passed)
3.      Current State statute (2011) states when Bowie Training Center is no longer required to be operated as a thoroughbred training facility, the State shall have first right of refusal for conveyance of the property, and the City of Bowie has second right of refusal.  This statute does not repeal 11-519.
Article 9-1A-09 – Article - State Government
§9–1A–09. IN EFFECT
(a) As a condition of eligibility for funding under § 9–1A–29 of this subtitle, a racing licensee shall:
(4) (i) A racing licensee of a racetrack location at Laurel Park shall:
1. maintain the operation of the Bowie Training Center; or
2. convey the property associated with the Bowie Training Center as preserved land.
(ii) 1. When the Bowie Training Center is no longer required by the State to be operated as a thoroughbred training facility, the State shall have the right of first refusal as grantee for any conveyance under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.
2. The City of Bowie shall have the second right of refusal as grantee for any conveyance under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.
3. A grantee under subsubparagraph 1 or 2 of this subparagraph may not be required to operate the Bowie Training Center as a training facility.

9–1A–09. // EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 2013 PER CHAPTER 412 OF 2011 //
(4) If a video lottery operation license is issued to a racetrack location at Laurel Park, the video lottery operation licensee shall:
(i) maintain the operation of the Bowie Training Center; or
(ii) if State law no longer requires the Bowie Training Center to operate as a training facility, convey the property associated with the Bowie Training Center to the State as preserved land under Program Open Space.” 

4.  Additional information of interest:
-Language in 10-year Agreement
 “…The MTHA has also agreed to a closure of Bowie Training Center on January 1, 2014 in return for a binding commitment to build 300 net new stalls at Laurel Park funded in part by the MTHA to properly accommodate horsemen displaced by the closure.”
And:  “Highlights of the Agreement” - Bowie Training Center -
Legislation and Commission approval to authorize the closing of Bowie is contingent upon the construction of 300 new stalls at Laurel no later than December 31, 2014 and a requirement that Laurel Park and Pimlico remain open for year-round stabling and training at no cost to the horsemen.  Such legislation and Commission approval shall also provide that Bowie may not be closed until completion of the initial 150 stalls.”

Note:  Even if the 150 stalls are completed in 2013, the current statute has not been repealed.   Bowie will be required to operate as a Thoroughbred training facility until a bill is introduced and passed in a legislative session repealing that statute.
-Additional details on the agreement are also included in The Equiery’s blog post:  “Finally, A Happy Christmas for Racing” (Dec. 18, 2012), but no Bowie discussion.

Monday, April 8, 2013

"Rules of the road" for riding on roads

The Horse Council recently received an inquiry about what laws govern riding horses on public roads in Maryland. Thanks to MHC member, Kathleen Tabor, Esq. (www.ktaborlaw.com), here is the answer:


Basically the rider of a horse has the same rights and responsibilities as a driver of a car (minus having a license plate, turn signals, and other unapplicable provisions). See below:


MD Code Transp. 21-104 Persons riding animals or driving animal-drawn vehicles (Maryland Code (2013 Edition))


(a) In general. -- Every person riding an animal or driving an animal-drawn vehicle on a roadway has all the rights granted to and is subject to all the duties required of the driver of a vehicle by this title, except for those provisions of this title that by their very nature cannot apply.

(b) Special prohibitions. --

(1) Except in Charles, Worcester, and St. Mary's counties, or as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, a person may not ride an animal or drive an animal-drawn vehicle on:

(i) Any divided highway where the posted maximum speed limit is more than 35 miles an hour; or

(ii) Any controlled access highway.

(2) In Anne Arundel County, a person may ride an animal on any part of a highway described in paragraph (1) of this subsection, other than on its roadway or shoulder.

HISTORY: An. Code 1957, art. 66 1/2, § 11-104; 1977, ch. 14, § 2; ch. 738.