By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

In August 2025, at a dog breeding operation in Missouri, a husky mix named Masterpiece got sick with diarrhea and appeared weak. The owner of the facility, who is licensed under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, simply killed him.

In response, the USDA suspended the breeder’s license in January for just 21 days. Now the license is active again.

This is the kind of ongoing cruelty and indifference toward animals we are constantly fighting. Every year we issue our Horrible Hundred report to expose puppy mills across the U.S. Our new report speaks for Masterpiece and all the other dogs who are suffering—or even dying—at the hands of a wholly legal and licensed industry permitted to sell its dogs to pet stores and online.

This year’s report included more than 20 breeders who have sold puppies to Petland—the only national chain of pet stores in the U.S. that still sells puppies—and have repeatedly been exposed for cruelty. Many other breeders in the report put their puppies up for sale on social media and on websites, such as Puppies.com, GreenfieldPuppies.com and LancasterPuppies.com, to families who don’t even meet their puppy in person prior to purchase.

These states have high numbers of puppy mills.

For the 14th year in a row, Missouri has the highest number of bad breeders in the report. Missouri is followed by Wisconsin, New York, Pennsylvania, Kansas and Ohio. These higher numbers generally indicate the states have a glut of commercial breeders but can also indicate an enforcement program that needs more funding and support. States with a stronger enforcement program often produce more documentation than states with no enforcement.

Our Stop Puppy Mills team scours state, federal, court and other records to bring these stories to light so that the public can understand the truth behind puppy mills.

At a licensed Missouri puppy mill, Hidden Valley Farms, which sold puppies to Petland, a dog named May May was found staggering; others were thin, and a French bulldog named Pebbles was found alive but “unresponsive.” We know the sad fate of Masterpiece, but so often it is impossible to know what happens to the dogs in the puppy mill system—the reports offer only fragments of their stories.

The Horrible Hundred report helps to give a voice to dogs who can’t speak for themselves.

For 14 years, we have published our Horrible Hundred report not to “name and shame” breeders but to shine a light on a pervasive and systemic cruelty to dogs. What puppy mill dogs are forced to endure most dog lovers would agree is unacceptable.

The details attest to the urgent need for stronger laws and enforcement efforts to address inhumane commercial dog breeders across the country: Underweight mother dogs with their ribs showing. Dogs in bitterly cold temperatures with only frozen water to drink. A lethargic puppy who was injected with a medication formulated for farm animals instead of being taken to a veterinarian.

Here are some specific details we uncovered and feature in the new report:

• Authorities reported a Pennsylvania breeder, Chester View Kennel, for suspected animal cruelty after the breeder used tight “rubber ligature[s]” in an attempt to “dock” puppies’ tails, but the breeder appears to be operating as of April 2026.
• A dog was found dead of apparent hypothermia at a breeding kennel in Nebraska, Sandhills Dachshunds, in December 2025.
• A dog at Happy Canine Kennel in Wisconsin had such a severe injury to his eye that the eye had to be surgically removed.
• An inspector visiting Bow Wow Mound Kennels in Kansas was so overcome by strong odors that their eyes, nose and throat had a burning sensation and they had to flee the building to use an inhaler; the kennel had sold puppies to Petland.

The public has a right to know what happens at puppy mills.

This is the status quo: Behind closed doors at puppy mills, mother dogs are forced to breed and birth litter after litter until their bodies are exhausted. Their pups are treated as commodities to feed an industry that takes advantage of people’s love for animals. Some pups from puppy mills suffer from lifelong health or behavioral problems, stemming from the deprivation of their early puppyhood. Most of the puppy mills in the Horrible Hundred report are state or federally licensed, and many sell dogs to pet stores like Petland.

The Horrible Hundred report is making a difference.

In past years, after our Horrible Hundred report has come out, some of the largest puppy mills that appeared in these reports closed and/or were significantly fined or criminally charged. These and other closures brought the total of animals rescued from Horrible Hundred breeders over the years to more than 3,330.

We continue to press authorities to take stronger action against repeat offenders and to enact tougher policies to prevent poor conditions at commercial pet breeders from escalating into animal cruelty.

You can also make a difference for dogs.

Eight states and over 520 localities prohibit the sale of puppy mill puppies in pet shops, and we’re working with several other states and cities on enacting this policy as we write this. This crucial work is a blow to cruel puppy mills, but it doesn’t replace the need to crack down on the mills themselves. That’s why we are pushing for federal solutions, too.

There are two bills that would better the lives of dogs at puppy mills in the U.S. The Puppy Protection Act would improve the quality of life of dogs in USDA-licensed breeding facilities by requiring stronger standards of care including increased enclosure sizes, solid flooring, exercise, feeding twice per day, socialization, increased veterinary care and protection from extreme temperatures. It would also impose breeding limits and ensure that breeders make reasonable efforts to rehome retired dogs instead of discarding or killing them.

Pass the Puppy Protection Act >>

The Better Collaboration, Accountability, and Regulatory Enforcement (CARE) for Animals Act would amend the Animal Welfare Act to enhance the enforcement capacities of the U.S. Department of Justice and reinforce multi-agency collaboration between the DOJ and the USDA. This will make it easier to shut down problematic breeders licensed under the USDA for good.

Pass the Better CARE for Animals Act >>

We can end the cruelty of this industry but we must all come together to raise awareness of the plight of puppy mill dogs and call on lawmakers to take action. You can also share this information with your family and friends, urging them to never buy a dog or cat from a pet store or online. Together, we can create a world in which dogs are treated as companions, not commodities. 

Kitty Block is president and CEO of Humane World for Animals.

WASHINGTON (April 27, 2026)—Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislation Fund, announced its endorsement of Brian Fitzpatrick for Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District. As the nation’s leading political animal advocacy organization, Humane World Action Fund endorses candidates based on their demonstrated commitment to animal protection, evaluating each candidate only on their record and positions on animal welfare issues.

“As co-chair of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus and a committed leader on animal protection issues, Brian Fitzpatrick has shown remarkable leadership in the US Congress and with federal agencies alike,” said Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund. “As a former FBI agent, he understands the criminal activity underlying everything from dog fighting to violations of the Animal Welfare Act and the costs it presents to a more humane society. He's championing the Puppy Protection Act and the Better CARE for Animals Act to strengthen Animal Welfare Act standards and enforcement. We urge voters in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District to reelect Brian Fitzpatrick to Congress.”

Rep. Fitzpatrick is a co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, which works to promote animal protection initiatives to other members of Congress. He earned a perfect score of 100+ on Humane World Action Fund’s 2025 Humane Scorecard.

“Cruelty, violence, and hatred have no place in our society—against anyone or anything. That principle has always guided my work, and Humane World Action Fund has long stood at the forefront of the effort to protect animals from abuse, neglect, and cruelty. Over the years, we have worked in close partnership to strengthen federal animal welfare laws, raise standards, close dangerous gaps in protection, and ensure that accountability is more than an aspiration. I am deeply grateful for their trust, their partnership, and the honor of their endorsement. My heartfelt thanks to Sara Amundson, Kitty Block, and the entire Humane World Action Fund team for their leadership, conviction, and steadfast devotion to this cause,” said Congressman Fitzpatrick.

Pro-animal actions taken by Rep. Fitzpatrick in the 119th Congress include:

• Sponsoring the Puppy Protection Act (H.R. 2253) to address serious gaps in welfare standards for tens of thousands of breeding dogs and puppies at large-scale breeding operations licensed by the USDA.
• Cosponsoring the Better Collaboration, Accountability, and Regulatory Enforcement (CARE) for Animals Act (H.R. 3112), which would strengthen collaboration between the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ensure sufficient enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and help deter violations.
• Cosponsoring the Save America’s Forgotten Equines (SAFE) Act (H.R. 1661) to prohibit the reopening of horse slaughter plants in the U.S. and the export of American horses to slaughter for human consumption.
• Voting against the misleadingly named Pet and Livestock Protection Act, which would force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in the lower 48 states and block judicial review of the action, leaving wolves vulnerable to an onslaught of trophy hunting and recreational trapping.
• Co-signing a letter to the Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee which asked for provisions in the FY2026 funding bill for enforcement of the AWA, Horse Protection Act (HPA), Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and federal animal fighting law, as well as for programs to promote alternatives to animal testing, to provide shelter for domestic violence survivors with pets through the Protecting Animals With Shelter (PAWS) grant program, and to assist veterinarians working in designated veterinary shortage areas.
• Co-signing a letter to the Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee that asked for a provision to permanently defund USDA horse slaughter inspections and thus prevent horse slaughter plants from ever operating in the U.S.

View a running list of 2026 endorsements made by Humane World Action Fund at humaneaction.org/endorsements.

Media Contact: Liz Bartolomeo; ebartolomeo@humaneaction.org, 240-472-0475

WASHINGTON (April 27, 2026)—Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislation Fund, announced its endorsement of Guy Reschenthaler for Pennsylvania's 14th Congressional District. As the nation’s leading political animal advocacy organization, Humane World Action Fund endorses candidates based on their demonstrated commitment to animal protection, evaluating each candidate only on their record and positions on animal welfare issues.

“Beginning in the Pennsylvania legislature and now within leadership in the US Congress, Guy Reschenthaler's championing of key animal protection measures reflects America’s deep love of animals. He's leading the Better CARE for Animals Act and the Puppy Protection Act to crack down on abuses of dogs in puppy mills and laboratories” said Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund. “His actions in Congress helped advance humane policies and protect animals from cruelty and exploitation. We urge voters in Pennsylvania’s 14th Congressional District to send Rep. Reschenthaler back to Congress.”

Rep. Reschenthaler is a member of the bipartisan Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, which works to promote animal protection initiatives to other members of Congress.

Pro-animal actions taken by Rep. Reschenthaler in the 119th Congress include:

• Co-leading the Better Collaboration, Accountability, and Regulatory Enforcement (CARE) for Animals Act (H.R. 3112), which would strengthen collaboration between the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ensure sufficient enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and help deter violations.
• Co-leading the Puppy Protection Act (H.R. 2253) to address serious gaps in welfare standards for tens of thousands of breeding dogs and puppies at large-scale breeding operations licensed by the USDA.

View a running list of 2026 endorsements made by Humane World Action Fund at humaneaction.org/endorsements.

Media Contact: Liz Bartolomeo; ebartolomeo@humaneaction.org, 240-472-0475

WASHINGTON (April 27, 2026)—Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislation Fund, announced its endorsement of Jimmy Panetta for California’s 19th Congressional District. As the nation’s leading political animal advocacy organization, Humane World Action Fund endorses candidates based on their demonstrated commitment to animal protection, evaluating each candidate only on their record and positions on animal welfare issues.

“Jimmy Panetta reflects the value Americans place on our companion animals. He's a lead sponsor of the Puppy Protection Act to ensure dogs and puppies have better protections and care,” said Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund. “His actions in Congress helped advance humane policies and protect animals from cruelty and exploitation. We urge voters in California’s 19th Congressional District to reelect Jimmy Panetta to Congress.”

Pro-animal actions taken by Rep. Panetta in the 119th Congress include:

• Co-leading the Puppy Protection Act (H.R. 2253) to address serious gaps in welfare standards for tens of thousands of breeding dogs and puppies at large-scale breeding operations licensed by the USDA.
• Voting against a floor amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 3838) to exempt defense-related activities from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and prohibit the designation of military and certain National Guard lands as critical habitats under the Endangered Species Act, exposing endangered and threatened species to unrestricted harm and possible extinction.
• Co-signing appropriations requests seeking provisions in the fiscal year 2026 funding bill for enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), Horse Protection Act (HPA), Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and federal animal fighting law, as well as for programs to promote alternatives to animal testing, to provide shelter for domestic violence survivors with pets through the Protecting Animals With Shelter (PAWS) grant program, and to assist veterinarians working in designated veterinary shortage areas.
• Voting against the misleadingly named Pet and Livestock Protection Act, which would force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in the lower 48 states and block judicial review of the action, leaving wolves vulnerable to an onslaught of trophy hunting and recreational trapping.

View a running list of 2026 endorsements made by Humane World Action Fund at humaneaction.org/endorsements.

Media Contact: Liz Bartolomeo; ebartolomeo@humaneaction.org, 240-472-0475

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

The day of judgment has come for Big Pork’s last-ditch attempt to destroy the ability of states to enact farm animal protection laws. This week, the Save Our Bacon Act, the pork industry’s current vehicle for attacking these laws, will come to the House floor for a vote as part of the “skinny farm bill.” And that’s where we must stop it, in the U.S. Congress, as an act of true mercy for the suffering pigs who, by the millions, day after day and year after year, are the victims of Big Pork’s cruelty. If you’ve ever wanted to send a pointed message about bringing an end to intensive confinement in the pork industry, this is the moment.

Ask Your Representative to Strip the SOB Act From the Farm Bill

Big Pork’s wingman

If Big Pork had a wingman, it would be House Agriculture Committee chair Glenn Thompson, the man responsible for stitching the SOB Act into the “skinny farm bill.” Truth be told, this is not actually a Farm Bill at all. The key elements of traditional Farm Bills—substantial subsidies for American agriculture and rural communities—passed last year as part of a larger tax package, and the bill Thompson has sent to the full House is skinny on genuine benefits for real farmers and rural populations, because it’s not about them. As for the SOB Act, it’s a blatant stickup job for the factory farming interests that want to keep profits high and animal welfare standards low.

Of Thompson’s leadership in efforts to scuttle Proposition 12 and related state laws, the most important thing to say is this: It’s irresponsible—in the extreme. Inexplicably, he’s ignored the many farmers and producers, including some prominent and successful ones in his home state, who have embraced higher animal welfare standards. These parties have committed to practices that are in alignment with consumer demand and the growing shift in public attitudes about our responsibilities to animals. This is also the attitude of food service corporations, which, independently of the statutes enacted in state after state, have chosen to implement higher standards throughout their supply chains in the United States and abroad.  

The pork titans do not recognize or admit that opposition to intensive confinement on animal welfare grounds is entirely justified. But it is. The whole fight over Prop 12 involves a dying business model that is out of step with American tastes and values, and no longer acceptable on moral or public health grounds. Prop 12, passed by California voters in 2018, simply bans the extreme confinement of mother pigs, egg-laying hens and calves used for veal in California, and outlaws the sale within the state of pork, eggs and veal sourced from extreme confinement.

The winds of change

More than a dozen states, red, blue and purple, have enacted bans on the extreme confinement of farm animals. An intelligent appraisal of the winds of change sweeping through the food production sector in recent years would have put Thompson and his Agriculture Committee colleagues in a position to champion a new path for pork production, one that is more sustainable, more humane and beneficial to smaller producers, and a whole lot better for the social, cultural, economic and environmental health of rural communities.  

Instead, Thompson and other agricultural leaders have slavishly pandered to the National Pork Producers Council, the Iowa Pork Producers Association and the megadonor pork barons who stand up such tinhorn trade associations with their money. And now, amidst the obvious signs that there are many members of his own caucus who do not support the attack on state and local agricultural laws, Thompson has arrogantly forced this measure to a full vote.

The farm bill package Thompson has been pushing is under fire from many quarters, including a host of organizations that have decried the Agriculture Committee’s failure to restore cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Insurance program, and a mix of Republicans and Democrats concerned about a provision that would create a uniform national pesticide label to preempt state and local mandates for stricter labeling of pesticides. The pesticide provision represents the same kind of backroom scale-tipping that has taken Big Pork’s campaign to overturn Prop 12 from serial losses in our court system (all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court in May 2023) to its vampire-like resurrection by the congressional delegation from Iowa (Sens. Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley, and Reps. Ashley Hinson, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Zachary Nunn, and Randy Feenstra). With Chairman Thompson, they are determined to foist Big Pork’s bottom-of-the-barrel, zero-welfare pork production model on the rest of the nation. If Pork was a state, they would be its caucus members.

It’s time to settle this once and for all

We’ re grateful to Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), Jim Costa (D-CA), Andrew Garbarino (R-NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Veronica Escobar (D-TX), Mark Takano (D-CA), Sarah McBride (D-DE), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Gabe Amo (D-RI), Nancy Mace (R-SC), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Kevin Mullin (D-CA),  Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Sara Jacobs (D-CA), and Vern Buchanan (R-FL) who have introduced a bipartisan amendment to remove the SOB Act from this package.

In the current environment, this is really stepping up, and it shows that these legislators believe, as we do, that it’s necessary to do so. The SOB Act is an unseemly bid to make a ghastly intensive confinement model for pork production, with its utter disregard for public health, animal welfare, water quality and environmental protection, the de facto standard of the United States.

We’re too good for that, and the citizens and legislatures of a host of states have made it clear that the dominance of this type of production will not be the future of the pork industry. That trend is certain to continue, and one day it will make intensive confinement of pigs a bad memory of a wrong turn taken in American agriculture.

The only useful thing about Big Pork’s underhanded ploy in forcing this provision in the Farm Bill is that it gives us a chance to mobilize the countless Americans, including farmers and producers who support and welcome higher animal welfare standards, to put these special interests in their place by sending their radical attack on the rule of law and animal welfare into oblivion, where it belongs.

Kitty Block is president and CEO of Humane World for Animals.

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

Soring is an undeniably cruel practice involving the use of caustic chemicals (blistering agents like mustard oil, diesel fuel and kerosene) and constricting devices —stacked pads, chains and tight metal bands, and sometimes even the cutting or thinning of horses’ soles or the use of other means to make their feet particularly sensitive to pain.

This is what some people do, intentionally inflicting pain on horses’ feet and legs to force them to perform the “Big Lick,” an exaggerated high-stepping gait for Tennessee Walking Horse shows.

We have been battling to end horse soring for years—and we are so close to winning this fight. But every time we get to the finish line, it feels like there’s a few exaggerated high steps back. For years, we have constructively engaged the U.S. Department of Agriculture and encouraged efforts to build a system of enforcement that actually works. But something always gets in the way, and the agency just isn't honoring its obligation to protect horses under the Horse Protection Act.

We were infuriated by the USDA’s January 2026 announcement of a further suspension on the implementation of long overdue regulatory reforms to protect horses from soring. We had seen enough, and we decided to do something about it. We’re suing the agency.

In a lawsuit filed this week by attorneys from the Humane World Animal Protection Law division, Humane World for Animals, Humane World Action Fund and several individuals who love and care for Tennessee Walking Horses challenged the USDA’s decision to withdraw several rules and procedures critical to the prevention of soring.

These are not minor but long-standing rules designed to help inspectors identify horses at shows with signs consistent with soring —the “scar rule”—and prevent horses from being shown again after failing inspection—the “no showback rule.” The agency also abandoned the process for disqualifying sore horses at shows, and suspended a final regulation intended to replace the ineffective system of industry self-policing.

Without these rules, we believe the agency is violating its statutory mandate to end soring, and we’re already seeing the harmful consequences. In prior years, USDA inspectors referred soring violations directly to show management, resulting in real-time disqualifications at shows just as Congress intended when it passed the Horse Protection Act decades ago. The agency has now explicitly abandoned that enforcement pathway.

On March 14, 2026, the USDA made clear it was returning essentially all responsibility for enforcement to the industry—to the very people who profit from soring—stating that it hoped that the industry could “make the sixth time the charm,” allowing self-policing to continue despite repeated past attempts and decades of evidence that it does not work.

The results are disturbing. Our staff members have observed horses entering the show ring this season (after passing inspection by industry inspectors) while struggling to move, stumbling and being unable to even complete a class. This is a direct consequence of a system where industry-led inspections fail to detect or deter soring.

Our lawsuit asks the court to hold the USDA accountable to the law and to prioritize protecting horses, as the Horse Protection Act intended, rather than shielding an industry that profits from their suffering.

Without proper oversight, the risk is not theoretical. Soring involves the continued use of methods designed to make every step agonizing. Substances are used to inflame and agitate the legs so that even light contact causes pain. Heavy, stacked shoes and pads are manipulated to create pressure and horses’ hooves may be pared down to increase sensation. Chains strike chemically burned and already sore areas with each step, amplifying pain and forcing the show gait that judges reward in some walking horse competitions.

The horse was clearly in agony

One of the suit’s individual plaintiffs, Bill Coon, recalls the day he realized trainers had sored his horse, National Bank, without his consent or knowledge. “I showed up at the barn unannounced. I asked the barn manager to get National Bank out of his stall [and] was surprised at the shocked look on the barn folks’ faces. The stalls in the barn had a 6-inch berm [barrier] that the stall sliding door opened on. To my surprise I was watching a 16.2 hand horse not able to step over the berm.”

The horse was clearly in agony. Bill ended the training and brought National Bank home. Bill has since dedicated himself to advocating for the humane treatment of walking horses and promoting alternative shows for sound, pain-free horses.

A beloved horse abused behind closed doors

Another plaintiff, Jacqueline (“Jacque”) Kasselman experienced similar deception and gained firsthand knowledge of the utter inadequacy of the current inspection system.

Jacque purchased Trip, her Tennessee Walking Horse, so that her granddaughter could participate in shows. Concerned about the widespread use of soring, Jacque relied on the representations of industry professionals that her horse could be trained to perform the “Big Lick” walk without the cruel practice. Jacque also relied on the USDA’s legal obligations to protect horses. But things were not adding up. The trainer did not allow Trip, who was kept in a show barn away from Jacque’s home, to see Jacque’s veterinarian or farrier, insisting they use a different local veterinarian and a farrier flown in from Tennessee. Later, at shows, Jacque and her granddaughter were told to stay away from the inspection zone.

Suspicious, Jacque removed Trip from the walking horse shows and brought him home. Only later did she grasp what had happened. Trip had been sedated, the soles of his feet cut thin to intensify the impact of his heavy padded shoes.

Jacque’s personal veterinarian and farrier, who saw Trip shortly after she pulled him from the show, said his hooves were so damaged that—had they been cut down a millimeter more— euthanasia might have been warranted.

“I learned the hard way to not play organ music around him,” says Jacque—old fashioned organ music is widely played at Walking Horse shows. If he hears the music now, he puffs up and becomes extremely anxious. Jacque has dedicated countless hours, money and energy to his recovery, but the physical and psychological impact remains. “I’ve cried a lot of tears over his journey,” she says.

The end of soring

When we sue an agency of the federal government, we do not do so lightly. We do so as a matter of justice, and in this case specifically, to restore the protections that we and many other parties have worked for years to achieve. The law is clear, and so is the USDA’s responsibility: Horses should not suffer for the sake of a show ribbon.   

Kitty Block is CEO and president of Humane World for Animals.

Lawsuit alleges USDA neglects its duty under the Horse Protection Act to end abusive ‘Big Lick’ practices on Tennessee Walking Horses

WASHINGTON (April 22, 2026)—Humane World for Animals and Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society Legislative Fund, today filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture for not fulfilling its responsibility to protect Tennessee Walking Horses and similar breeds from the cruel practice of “soring.” The Horse Protection Act, passed in 1970, is designed to prevent the painful and illegal practice of soring, in which horses’ legs and hooves are deliberately injured to exaggerate their gait for “Big Lick” competitions.

Yet, as the lawsuit makes plain, the USDA has shelved several rules and procedures critical to the administration and enforcement of the Horse Protection Act. These include the elimination of industry self-policing at competitions, a system the agency agreed back in 2010 to end after a USDA Office of Inspector General audit found it to be a failure, as well as the process for referring sore and injured horses for disqualification at shows.

The plaintiffs are Humane World for Animals and Humane World Action Fund, plus several individuals who have owned Walking Horses.

“No horse should be made to suffer for a blue ribbon,” said Kimberly Ockene, managing attorney for equine matters at Humane World for Animals. “Under the Horse Protection Act, showing a sored horse is illegal, yet unlawful decisions by USDA and industry self-policing have allowed this terrible abuse to continue. We’re filing this lawsuit today because the USDA has delayed critical reforms too many times. By repeatedly stalling on implementation of long-promised improvements to federal oversight, the USDA is denying Walking Horses the protection the law provides them.”

Humane World for Animals and Humane World Action Fund have a long history of advocating for stronger protection for Tennessee Walking Horses and related breeds. Today’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, asks the court to hold USDA to its mandate under the Horse Protection Act. All plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from the Animal Protection Law department of Humane World for Animals.

A copy of the lawsuit is available here.

Download Photos/Video of investigations concerning horse soring.

Media Contacts:

• Emily Gugel, 202-779-1814, eehrhorn@humaneworld.org 
• Liz Bartolomeo, 240-472-0475, lbartolomeo@humaneworld.org 

Earth Day reversal signals growing resistance to legislation that would undermine federal wildlife protections

WASHINGTON (April 22, 2026)—Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislative Fund, shared a significant update regarding the ESA Amendments Act. Republican leadership has officially pulled the bill from the House floor and postponed today's scheduled vote after it became clear there was sufficient opposition to prevent its passage.

Sara Amundson, president, Humane World for Animals Action Fund, said:

“On Earth Day, pulling the House vote on the deeply flawed Endangered Species Act bill is a clarion call that legislators need to stop heeding their own leadership and start doing the will of their constituents. At a time when we should be strengthening protections for species like grizzly bears and sea turtles, not weakening them, it’s clear there is growing opposition to efforts that put special interests ahead of science and conservation. We urge Congress to abandon this harmful proposal altogether and instead focus on upholding and strengthening the Endangered Species Act for future generations.” 

🚨BREAKING🚨 

The House just cancelled its ill-advised plan to celebrate #EarthDay by voting on the ESA Amendments Act (H.R. 1897)—a disastrous bill designed to gut the Endangered Species Act.

For over 53 years, the #EndangeredSpeciesAct has been a critical lifeline for iconic… pic.twitter.com/uA002IbBZl

— Humane World Action Fund (@humaneactfund) April 22, 2026

Media Contact: Liz Bartolomeo; ebartolomeo@humaneaction.org  

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

The Endangered Species Act, a landmark law for the protection of wildlife, is under attack. In late March, the Trump administration convened the federal Endangered Species Committee for only the fourth time in its nearly 50-year history. Under the law, the Committee has the extraordinary power to grant case-by-case exemptions to the protections of the Endangered Species Act— in essence, the authority to decide that a project should be allowed to proceed despite jeopardizing the very existence of an endangered species.

The Committee, dubbed the “God Squad” by some, is seldom convened because Americans place tremendous value on the protection of listed species, and because practical alternatives that do not risk their survival are almost always available.

Yet last month, its members took less than 15 minutes to grant sweeping exemptions under the law, relieving oil and gas companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico from any further burdens of caution or prudence regarding the protection of whales, turtles or other wildlife. The move was exceptional not only because the Committee has so rarely been convened, but also because its members threw caution to the wind and exempted countless projects, any of which could spell extinction for imperiled species— a far cry from the case-by-case review contemplated by the statute.

As a result, industry drillships and supply vessels may no longer be required to run at lower speeds to reduce the frequency of collisions with the Rice’s whale, one of the most endangered whales in the world, found only in the Gulf. There are just 50 or so of these majestic members of the baleen whale family, who grow to about 40 feet long and have distinctive ridges on the top of their heads. Their population collapsed precipitously following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and the catastrophic marine oil spill that followed.

This nearly unprecedented decision by a committee which last met in 1992 is part of a wider campaign to destroy the few existing protections there are for endangered and threatened wildlife species, especially the Endangered Species Act.

A dangerous attack on the ESA has now emerged in the U.S. House of Representatives, too, in a bill introduced by the House Natural Resources Committee chair, Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR). Westerman’s bill, the ESA Amendments Act of 2025 (H.R. 1897), doesn’t have a catchy congressional acronym in its title, but it’s properly numbered, because its passage would set wildlife protection back well over a century.

The bill’s preamble says it will “optimize conservation through resource prioritization, incentivize wildlife conservation on private lands, provide for greater incentives to recover listed species, create greater transparency and accountability in recovering listed species, streamline the permitting process, eliminate barriers to conservation, and restore congressional intent.”

In reality, it’s a full-scale assault on the cornerstone of American species protection for the last 53 years.

Among other things, H.R. 1897 would:

• drag out the timeline for securing a species’ protection to 5 to 10 years 
• expand the power of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reject the designation of unoccupied areas as critical habitat
• shift responsibility for key implementation decisions to state agencies poorly equipped for that ro
• replace U.S. review of imports of sensitive species with weaker international treaty standards
• hamper FWS’s ability to effectively protect threatened species, and
• preclude judicial review of key decisions

This bill is also a trophy hunter’s dream and a nightmare for imperiled species across the globe. Not only would it incentivize increased trophy hunting by making it easier for hunters to bring their kills back to the United States, but it would effectively repeal regulations intended to protect African elephants and lions. This is just one example of the way in which the weakening of domestic legislation in the U.S. can have far-reaching implications for other nations.

Save the Endangered Species Act >>

Attacks on the ESA are not new, and yet, it is true that for a decade or so now the law has become the focused target of an intense, deliberate and far-reaching assault, plotted out in corporate boardrooms, federal agencies and congressional committees. It is deeply saddening to see so many elected officials leading the drive toward animals’ extinction by intentionally killing off a remarkable legislative achievement that has ensured the survival of hundreds of species since its passage in the 1970s and has brought a number of species back from the brink, setting a standard for deliberation over the protection of many others.

The indisputable truth is this: We need the ESA more than ever. Whether the harms are caused by poaching, habitat loss or industry action aided and abetted by government, the effect is the same for the species involved. In the same vein, those of us who care must do our best to confront every threat of this kind, whether it comes from a biased committee in the executive branch or a zealous faction in Congress. 

Kitty Block is CEO and president of Humane World for Animals.

Bipartisan bill SF 2099—passed unanimously by the Iowa House and through Senate committees—awaits a full Senate floor vote before the session adjourns

DES MOINES, Iowa (April 20, 2026)—A new statewide poll commissioned by Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislative Fund, finds that 59% of Iowa registered voters would be less likely to support a state senator who opposes or holds up a bill making intentional animal torture a felony on the first offense. Even more striking: 72% say they would be more likely to support a state senator who supports the bill—a finding that cuts sharply across party lines.

Republican voters are the most favorable on the bill with 77% saying they would be more likely to support a state senator who supports the bill. That strong majority of Republicans is joined by 71% of Democrats and 64% of nonpartisan voters.

The accountability finding comes from a direct question to Iowa voters: If their senator was one of those opposing or holding up the bill, would they be more or less likely to support that senator? Results show 59% said less likely, including 58% of Republicans, 60% of Democrats and 59% of nonpartisan voters.
“These results clearly show Iowa voters care deeply about animal cruelty as an issue, and members of the state senate would be well-advised to listen to their constituents,” said Brad Pyle, political director for Humane World Action Fund. “Opponents of this broadly supported legislation will pay a heavy price at the ballot box if they continue blocking this bill.”

SF 2099 passed the Iowa State House unanimously in March. It also advanced unanimously through a Senate subcommittee and the full Senate Judiciary Committee. It carries bipartisan support and is supported by law enforcement organizations including the Iowa Fraternal Order of Police, the Iowa Police Chiefs Association, and the Iowa State Sheriffs' & Deputies' Association, as well as the Iowa Veterinary Medical Association, domestic violence advocates, and a broad coalition of animal welfare organizations.
Not a single group has registered in opposition.

The bill would make intentional animal torture a Class D felony on the first offense—consistent with the laws of all 49 other states. Iowa is the only state that still treats extreme animal cruelty as a misdemeanor.

“Iowa is the only state in the union that does not make intentional animal torture a first-offense felony,” said Preston Moore, Iowa state director for Humane World Action Fund. “This commonsense legislation is supported by law enforcement and would put Iowa’s laws in line with the other 49 states.”

Poll Methodology: Survey conducted April 13 through April 16, 2026. 600 likely 2026 election voters participated in the survey. Survey weighted to match likely 2026 General Election turnout demographics. Margin of Error is +/- 4% with a 95% level of confidence.

View results here.

Media Contact: Liz Bartolomeo; ebartolomeo@humaneaction.org; 240-472-0475