Refer to this letter in the Desert Independent, posted 06/15/19.  It’s just one example.

Whenever you see a plea for ‘on-range management’ of wild horses (sometimes posited as ‘humane management’), run.

These organizations offer no meaningful resistance to the ranching juggernaut.

Instead, they argue about methods and timing: The range-fed beef producers want the horses gone now, by any means necessary, while the so-called advocates want their numbers to decline gradually, through application of contraceptives.

Consider the situation at Twin Peaks HMA, where the horses get the short end of the AUM stick.  Why aren’t they pushing back against the public-lands ranchers?

Might be a good idea to check their donor list before giving them money.

Adoption event last month at Pauls Valley Off-Range Corral in southern Oklahoma.

Remarks by the woman beginning at 5:11 are false.  The land can support way more than 26,000 horses and burros.  Herd sizes do not double every three years.  BLM forces these animals off their home range (public lands in Western U.S.) so their food can be sold to privately owned cattle and sheep.

Thanks to Camille’s Mustangs for getting this on film.

RELATED: Wild Horse Overpopulation?

Horse owners don’t have enough options for disposing of animals that aren’t wanted because they’re sick, old, unmanageable or fail to meet expectations, according to a ‘guest column‘ that appeared yesterday in Beef magazine.

Land managers can’t use it as a means of population control for wild horses.

And it’s a damn shame because it’s in the best interest of the animals to be killed, you see.

Just like abortion.  Saves hundreds of thousands of kids from lives of poverty and crime every year.

Legalizing slaughter would alleviate the pain and suffering of horses driven from their home range so their food can be sold to public-lands ranchers.  You know, families torn apart, pregnant mares dropping colts in feedlots and all that.  So unnecessary.

With today’s technology, the process could become highly efficient, opening the door to mass removals from western rangelands, putting an end once and for all to the ‘wild horse problem.’

Call it the Final Solution.

Lawmakers from Montana should endorse the ‘creative’ wild horse management plan announced on 04/22/19, according to an op-ed that appeared today in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle.  It’s the only way to stop the endless cycle of roundups.

The alternative, according to the writer, is the use of lethal tools, such as slaughter and mass killings, to manage wild horse and burro populations.

Although she criticizes current management practices, she does not ask why the roundups occur (as if wild horse overpopulation is an established fact, self-evident).

You can’t solve a problem by treating the symptoms, you to have to remove the causes.

The management plan focuses the symptoms (‘excess’ horses displaced from their home range) but ignores the causes (too many privately owned livestock grazing on public lands set aside for the horses).

In 1971 Velma Johnston won protections for wild horses but not for their land.

It’s time to end public-lands ranching, along with the bureaucracy that supports it.

A statement by the Forest Service dated 05/02/19, which coincides with the date that a photographer saw a man shooting at the horses, says “Rumors about possible suspects, gossip about motives, and general misinformation quickly spread throughout social media.”  Are they trying to downplay the incident?

Let’s look at facts:

1. The Heber WHT is composed of, and surrounded by, grazing allotments.
2. Ranchers benefit from reductions in wild horse numbers.
3. Ranchers have a well-established history of taking wild horses off the range.

That they have a motive for killing wild horses is not an accusation, it’s a reasoned conclusion.

RELATED: Group Criticizes Forest Service for Response to Heber Shootings.