The term does not appear in the original statute.

It can be found in the current statute, 16 USC 30, not in the definitions, but beginning in §1333(b)(1).

Footnotes to that section refer to amendments by Public Law 95–514, the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978, a product of the 95th Congress.

The alteration, found in Section 14 of the original Act, authorized the government to get rid of excess animals on an arbitrary and capricious basis.

Appropriate Management Levels, the number of horses or burros allowed by plan, would be achieved by removing or destroying excess animals (bottom of page 6 in the pdf), not by allowing them to fill their niche.  They were to be small, relative to the available resources.

Who benefits from that?

You can’t criticize public-lands ranchers about livestock grazing while you’re trying to get rid of wild horses with PZP—the latter helps the former—but the writer of a guest column in today’s online edition of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle does exactly that.

Miniscule AMLs, large amounts of forage assigned to livestock and enforcement actions such as helicopter roundups, fertility control, sex ratio skewing and sterilization have a common origin: Resource Management Plans, sometimes referred to as land-use plans.

If you want to help America’s wild horses, put your darting rifles down and change the plans so HMAs are managed principally for wild horses, not privately owned livestock.

RELATED: Rock Springs Roundup Just Getting Started.

A keyword search of a story posted today by Cowboy State Daily yielded these results:

• Forage – 0
• Allocation – 0
• Livestock – 0
• AUM – 0
• Allotment – 0
• Grazing – 0
• Permit – 0
• Consent decree – 0
• Horses – 23
• PZP – 7
• Darting – 2
• Overpopulation – 2
• Fertility control – 2

The author didn’t mention the forage assigned to livestock and the number of wild horses displaced thereby.

Are you sure you still want to read it?

RELATED: Rock Springs Roundup Day 19.

The Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses alleged on Monday that the agency moved the observation area to a location that blocks the view of the trap, which violates the public’s First Amendment right to observe the federal operation, according to a report posted yesterday by ABC4 News of Salt Lake City.

The group also wants cameras installed on the helicopters to create public transparency and independent oversight for operations that occur out of public view.

The organization and its supporters oppose wild horse roundups but not removals, arguing that the government should be getting rid of them with PZP not helicopters.

The lopsided resource allocations that put the interests of public-lands ranchers far above those of the horses, sometimes referred to as thriving ecological balances, are not on their radar screen.

PZP achieves the same results as the helicopters, in terms of herd sizes, but over a much longer timeframe.  The long-term effects may be worse than the roundups.  But that’s what the advocates bring to the table.

The state recently filed a motion to intervene in a case brought by Friend of Animals against the BLM disputing four of the agency’s management plans that affect wild horses in six HMAs, including Muddy Creek and Onaqui Mountain.

The plans authorize fertility control and roundups over ten-year periods, eliminating public input and oversight, according to a column in The Salt Lake Tribune.

Western Horse Watchers believes the focus is wrong and rejects the statement about oil, gas and mineral extraction projects damaging the environment and contributing to climate change.  While those activities may have an effect on wild horses, it is small compared to the impact of public-lands ranching.

Gather plans don’t change the land-use plans, they enforce them.  By minimizing AMLs and shifting most of the resources to livestock operators, they drive the roundups and other resource enforcement actions, including

• Fertility control
• Sex ratio skewing
• Sterilization
• Euthanasia

Why not target the land-use plans and the policies and regulations that support them?

Some have been around for over 20 years.  Why don’t they come up for public review on a regular basis or have sunset provisions that necessitate their reauthorizations?

Next to the federal government, nobody’s getting rid of more wild horses than they are.

But a column in the current edition of Horse Tales, titled ‘Wild Horse Tales,’ claims the danger is the very people who say they love them.

For example, residents who give them hay when snow arrives.  Others, including your host, who put out water for them.  Then there are those (OMG) who toss apples that might choke them or induce colic.

Don’t they realize they’re putting the lives of those horses at risk?

Every year the advocates knock on doors and try to politely reason with those that are guilty.  They would never try anything like that.

In some cases, the BLM gets a call about horses in someone’s yard, so they set a trap and remove an entire band.  A whole band!

Meanwhile, the advocates are getting rid of hundreds—if not thousands—of wild horses every year with their ruinous darting programs, as they lecture you about endangering their lives with water and apples.

They’re full of crap!

Back on the range, livestock graze peacefully in areas where the horses once roamed, thanks in part to the advocates.

The online fundraiser, benefitting the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses, will occur on November 4, according to an announcement at the bottom of page 3 in this month’s edition of Horse Tales.

Advocates use the term to signal their support for PZP darting programs.

If we get rid of them they can stay.  Their land will be managed primarily for livestock but we don’t want you to know about that.

A letter about the Rock Springs roundup in today’s edition of the Jackson Hole News & Guide refers to the same site as the letter cited in yesterday’s post about well-meaning individuals led astray by groups masquerading as defenders of wild horses.

The site offers three letters “that can be copy and pasted and sent to your local media, no matter if you live in Wyoming or New York.”  Two of them include exhortations for fertility control.

Who created this site, Keep Wyoming Wyld?

The browser tab shows the logo of the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses, an organization consumed by the overpopulation narrative and dedicated to long-term achievement of resource allocations that put the interests of public-lands ranchers far above those of the horses, sometimes referred to as achieving and maintaining AMLs.

RELATED: Management Priorities at Rock Springs HMAs.

Consider this letter to the editor about the Rock Springs roundup published yesterday by The State Journal of Frankfort, KY.  How could the author look at the data in Tables 1 and 8 of the Final EA and write something like that?

Easy.  She didn’t.  She knows nothing about them.  She was never informed by her sources about EAs, resource allocations and land-use plans.

How many other well-meaning individuals fall into that category?

They may be aware of the ranching advocacy groups, who don’t hide their agenda, but what about the variants dressed up as defenders of wild horses?

The message is always the same: Get rid of them.

The charlatans will tell you that getting rid of them with helicopters is bad, but getting the rid of them with PZP is good.  The process is slower so you need to be patient.

Although timing and methods differ, their goals are identical: Make sure that privately owned cattle and sheep are the primary, if not principal, consumers of resources in areas set aside for wild horses and burros.

RELATED: Management Priorities at Rock Springs HMAs.

The Senate Appropriations Committee has earmarked more than $10 million for the BLM to use fertility control instead of roundups, according to a report posted yesterday by KLAS News of Las Vegas.

The advocates want to replace cruel and inhumane helicopter roundups with cruel and inhumane darting programs, putting the interests of livestock operators far above those of the horses.  Helicopters achieve the same results but in a much shorter timeframe.

Who’s doing the lobbying?  Who’s paying for it?  Why are you still giving them money?

The woman interviewed for the story, referred to only as a “wild horse advocate,” is the Director of Government Relations for the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses, according to the staff directory.

RELATED: Roy, Like Most Advocates, Stuck on Stupid.

A secondary purpose of roundups is to humiliate and demoralize.

The advocates, defeated a long time ago, repeat the lies of government and help them minimize herd sizes, with benefits accruing to the public-lands ranchers.

The wild horse documentary produced by Robert Redford et al, which opened last week, is the latest example.

Your host has no desire to see the film, the trailer was enough.  If you saw it and wrote a review, put a link in the comments.

With consumer prices rising, the government is taking steps to boost competition in the supply chain, according to a report posted this morning by AP News.

If startups can’t control their costs, they will need to find customers who will pay more for their beef or manage with a lower profit margin than the big companies.

But what if they didn’t have to pay market rates to feed the animals?

The value of an average 1,370-pound steer is about $1,630, but that amount must be split between the slaughterhouse, feed lot and the rancher, who typically bears the largest expense of raising the animal for more than a year.

Put wild horses in the feed lots and turn out more livestock.  Take a closer look at the ‘Path Forward.’  Approve the Rock Springs RMP amendments.  Initiate more such projects, perhaps on an emergency basis.

Supply goes up and costs come down, giving political cover to the one-horse pony, his ruinous policies and his illicit administration.

The film features an array of stories about individuals and groups that are working with wild horses, according to the news release.

Sounds great.  If you want to help wild horses, don’t focus on the horses.  The advocates focus on the horses.

RELATED: New Wild Horse Documentary Avoids Public-Lands Ranching?

The executive director of the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses, a ranching advocacy group, told Wyoming News Now that her group is working with elected officials to force the BLM to use “the fertility shot.”

Folks, that’s all they bring to the table.  They have nothing else.

Their plan, which will ensure, over the long run, that privately owned cattle and sheep consume most of the resources in areas set aside for wild horses and burros, disrupts natural behaviors and drives birth rates to zero, while letting the herds die off.

Why are you still giving them money?

RELATED: RSGA Understands Management Process, Unlike Advocates.

Their operations manager, speaking about the BLM and the Rock Springs roundup, told the WyoFile reporter in an article published today that “They have management plans with defined numbers.  They should do their job and get it back to the numbers [for which] they plan to manage horses.”

The advocates, rather than challenge the plans and their lopsided resource allocations, tell you the government should be getting rid of the horses with PZP, not helicopters, and they need more of your money to carry out their important work.

So says a coalition of county commissioners and conservation districts, according to a report posted this morning by the online news service WyoFile.

Wild horse conservationists could make that argument, but not the government.

A case brought by RSGA resulted in a court order that’s driving the roundup and forcing the BLM to close three of the HMAs and downsize a fourth.

The BLM assigned 90% of the active AUMs in the massive Rock Springs allotment to RSGA, shown in the Western Watersheds map.

Enemies would not be so generous.

As for the status of the roundup, the gather page is still in blackout mode.  While an IT failure of a day or two might be excusable, this is not.  It has been going on for nearly a week.

RELATED: Can’t Blame Ranchers for Rock Springs Roundup?

Working, as of 10:45 PM EDT:

• News releases
• RAS
• ePlanning

Not Working:

• HMA pages
• Gather pages

Imagine the confusion if the outage occurred during the peak of roundup season.

RELATED: BLM Goes Dark Again.

If you’re in business to sell PZP, are you going to tell your donors that most wild horse areas are not overpopulated?

Woe to the advocates.

Eliminating cattle grazing to facilitate the well-being of herds of wild horses is not an option legally available to BLM, according to the writer of an opinion piece in today’s edition of The Salt Lake Tribune.

There was a difference in 1971 between areas where wild horses were found and areas where they were not found.

Today, some of those areas, referred to as HMAs, are managed primarily for livestock, while others, known as HAs, are managed almost exclusively for livestock.

With the 50th anniversary of the statute only about two months away, would you say that’s what Velma and the 92nd Congress had in mind?

RELATED: BLM Gaslighting American Public About Wild Horses?

A guest column about wild horses published this morning by The Durango Herald concludes with this question: “And what about those ranch families whose income depends on cattle and sheep that have less and less to eat?”

What about them?  Nobody’s trying to put them out of business.

Confine them to their base properties and let them pay market rates to feed their animals, like everybody else.  No more gravy train.

Manage wild horse areas principally for wild horses, not privately owned cattle and sheep, as specified in the statute.