Suppose private party A wants to graze livestock on lands owned by private party B.
1. What happens if an animal (owned by A) is hurt on B’s land? Is A free to enter B’s land to care for it? Is B liable?
2. What happens if A’s agent (employee, friend, contractor) trips over a rock on B’s land while checking the animals and breaks an arm?
3. What happens if an animal owned by A knocks down a fence on B’s property and feeds on B’s gardens?
To answer these questions, B may ask A to sign a lease or easement before placing any livestock on his property. This agreement spells out the relationship between the land owner (grantor) and livestock owner (grantee), sets limits of liability, specifies how and under what conditions grantee may enter grantor’s land, fees to be paid, termination of rights granted thereunder, etc.
In this and other such cases, grantee is subordinate to grantor. Grantor controls the situation, he specifies the terms of the deal.
Allowing an established advocacy group to take control of the Virginia Range horses, where Virginia Range land owners have no voice in the process, inverts the traditional relationship between grantor and grantee.
That is why ownership of the Virginia Range horses should be transferred to a non-profit corporation with land owners as voting members.