Livestock receive 85% of the authorized forage, excluding wildlife, but who’s counting!

RELATED: HMAPs Are Not the Answer.

Livestock receive four times more forage than the horses but who’s counting?

RELATED: HMAPs Are Not the Answer.

The statute, altered at the behest of ranching interests, protects wild horses and burros to some degree, but not their land.  It does not protect them from the advocates.

Roughly half of the land, if you include the proposed Rock Springs RMP Amendments, has been taken away and is now devoted almost exclusively to permitted grazing.

Areas with non-zero AMLs are managed primarily for livestock.

The resource management plans assign anywhere from 80% to 95% of the authorized forage to privately owned cattle and sheep.

The pest control programs follow naturally: Roundups, sterilizations, fertility control programs, sex ratio adjustments, adoption and training programs, off-range holding and sanctuaries.

Animals in off-range corrals (feedlots) are protected.

Animals in long-term holding are protected.  Most won’t be adopted.  They are sent there to die.

Animals in the adoption pipeline are protected, in theory, until they are titled.

If you only care about protection, you’re in good shape.

If you want to see them wild and free on their home range, and this does not include gradual extermination by the Montana Solution, as the advocates prefer, you have to focus on the RMPs and the bureaucrats who write them.

They never have to face you, the taxpayers and voters.

RELATED: Group Calls for End of Pancake Roundup, Demands Investigation.

The loss of a colt on Day 1 of the roundup sparked outrage among some advocates, according to a news release on EIN, but nobody’s asking why it’s occurring.

What about the foal that was put down on Day 4 of the Jackson Mountains roundup because it was an orphan?  Where’s the indignation?

Regarding HMAPs, if the resource management plan assigns 85% of the authorized forage to privately owned livestock, do you think you can write a new plan that assigns 98% of the resource to the horses with 2% to wildlife and make it stick?

Maybe they’re OK with the current allocations and just want to make sure the horses don’t suffer as they are enforced.

At least they didn’t use the death to justify a darting program for the Complex.

RELATED: Advocate Blames Roundups on Pipelines, Mines!

Commonly referred to as darting rifles, they allow the advocates, most of whom are women and most of whom are aborting/contracepting/sterilizing in their own lives, to project their moral depravity onto America’s wild horses.

RELATED: Putting the Montana Solution Into Practice: Projectors.

The Foundation for America’s Public Lands, a congressionally-chartered, non-profit institution authorized by Congress in 2017, launched yesterday, according to a BLM news release.

The Foundation will leverage public and private dollars to conserve, protect and restore lands managed by the federal agency.

How long before it’s co-opted by ranching interests?

Maybe that’s already baked into the charter.

There are too many of them and they’re robbing the poor ranchers of their birthright.

The SCC School of PZP Darting has all the answers and every mare has a target on her.

That’s how the advocates protect wild horses.

This group applies the Montana Solution to the McCullough Peaks herd.

They may not be able to convert an AML to AUMs or tell you the percentage of forage assigned to livestock in the HMA, but they know exactly how much adjuvant to add to the PZP and how long to mix them.

They say they’re protecting the horses but they’re actually protecting the public-lands ranchers.

Maybe they are public-lands ranchers.

RELATED: Ranchers and Advocates Snub McCullough Peaks Wild Horses.

Their home page suggests that they exist mostly to get rid of wild horses, although their workload was lightened by last year’s roundup.  Note the Gen 1 gauged projectors.

They must have carte blanche from the BLM, as they are providing a valuable service for the public-lands ranchers.

All they ask in return is a small donation to help them continue their important work.

RELATED: TOLDYA: Advocates Consigned to Mopping-Up Role.

Western Horse Watchers was unable to determine but a photo on their darting page shows the powder charge going off as a dart strikes a horse.

If the advocates will do this, what else will they do to our wild horses?

RELATED: Upgrading Your Gen 1 Projector.

A 2019 news release by IDA titled “These Guns Can Save Wild Horses and Burros” features a graduate from the SCC School of PZP Darting holding a Gen 1 gauged projector with scope and black satin finish.  She joins ranks with other foot soldiers advancing the Montana Solution across western rangelands.

Although propelled by a compressed gas, a powder charge goes off when the dart, formally known as an RDD, strikes the target, driving the payload into the animal.

Injuries are not uncommon, but where the technique is practiced, natural behaviors and youngsters are.  Livestock flourish as the herds are decimated.

You have to give them credit: The advocates speak with one voice, although it’s the wrong voice.

Ending permitted grazing, confining the ranchers to their base properties, and letting them pay market rates to feed their animals—like the rest of us—apparently has never crossed their minds.

RELATED: Can Darting Programs Compete with Helicopter Roundups?

The same thing as in other western states: Most of the resources have been fenced off and sold to public-lands ranchers, so, of course, they’re going to venture out of their habitats and into roads and private properties in search of food and water.

It’s not overpopulation, as the writer of this story for KTVX News of Salt Lake City would have you believe.

Although this report by KPVI News of Pocatello, ID mentions resource management plans, it does not explain them, but it’s far more informative than anything you’ll get from the advocates.

The article refers to legal actions by the Rock Springs Grazing Association and the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses as “Lawsuits from both sides of the debate,” which is not correct.

They are on the same side of the debate: One group wants the horses removed with helicopters, the other wants them removed with PZP.

The first method is fast and the second method is slow but both give the public-lands ranchers unfettered access to cheap feed in areas set aside for wild horses.

This bogus advocacy group cares more about its standing among the bureaucrats and ranchers than it does about America’s wild horses.

RELATED: Advocates to Interior: Let Us Get Rid of Rock Springs Horses.

The forage liberated by the removal of 20,000 wild horses from public lands would support 40,000 cow/calf pairs over a six-month grazing season.

The increase in supply will have little impact on beef prices, as the release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve did for fuel prices, but may convince some of the voters that the one-horse pony and his illicit administration have their interests in mind.

The government will collect $324,000 per year in grazing fees from the project, in exchange for the $20 million outlay to remove the horses plus $15 million per year to stockpile them in off-range holding.

The only way the enterprise survives is with huge subsidies from American taxpayers.

RELATED: Wild Horse Gather Plan Preceded by Beef/Poultry Action Plan.

Don’t ask the advocates.  Ask someone trapped for 23 hours in the snowstorm earlier this week on I-95 in Virginia.

If this motorist managed his fuel the way the advocates manage wild horses, he’d grab a screwdriver, puncture his tank and let the contents trickle to the ground.

The Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses, and the advocacy groups associated therewith, will not sponsor name-that-foal contests in 2022.

Deception will be the primary means of separating you from your money.

Revered by the advocates, he did not invent PZP but expanded its use in wild horse herds under the guise of population control.

Some of them make the pilgrimage to The Science and Conservation Center in Billings, which he founded, for training in the handling and use of PZP.

Why would you want to keep wild horse herds in check?  Because their land is managed primarily for livestock.  You won’t hear that from the advocates or the SCC.

The substance is a federally registered pesticide.  Curiously, a pest control license is not required to apply it.

RELATED: ‘Montana Solution’ Protects Livestock Not Horses.

Not exactly, the advocates are using PZP to get rid of them, not Zyklon B.

If I was a resident of Montana, I would not want the name of my state associated with the chemical eradication of wild horses.

He came into the world that we might be saved from eternal damnation.

If the government was going to remove the horses with helicopters, there’d be outrage.

But the Proposed Action will get rid of them with GonaCon or PZP.

Silence.

In both cases, the management plan assigns four times more forage to privately owned livestock than the horses.

The advocates don’t oppose the removals, only the way they are carried out.

What about the resource allocations that prompt them?

More silence.

RELATED: Comments Invited on Stewart Creek Pest Control Plan.