Western Horse Watchers Association
Exposing the Hypocrisy, Lies and Incompetence of the Wild Horse Advocates
Opinion
The damage occurred when the bureaucrats wrote the land-use plans. The idea of managing principally but not exclusively was thrown overboard and supplanted with federal regulations that nullify the original statute.
Everything happening now, including the removal of ‘excess’ animals, fertility control programs, sex-ratio skewing and sterilization research is the fulfillment of those plans.
Over 2,200 wild horses have been bumped out by privately owned livestock, as noted yesterday, and you want to get rid of more? Whose side are you on?
Actually, the HMA is one of the milder cases of resource mismanagement, with only 73% of the forage assigned to cattle and sheep.
If you want to see just how bad it can get, look at the numbers for Little Colorado HMA in Wyoming.
With 45,000 AUMs per year assigned to privately owned livestock, 3,750 wild horses have been displaced from that area.
These two HMAs account for more than 10% of the horses in off-range holding.
Put the darting rifles away and instead of doing something to these icons, do something for them.
RELATED: PZP Darting is Not the Answer.
In the typical wild horse area, ‘sharing their home’ means 80 to 95 percent of the forage has been assigned to privately owned livestock.
It’s not a minor problem.
The number of horses displaced from public lands by permitted grazing is so large that every one of them in off-range holding could be returned by ending the practice in just a few dozen HMAs.
Those who would get rid of them with contraceptives are ranching collaborators.
From Haaland’s Bold Vision for America’s Wild Horses on March 6 to Haaland to Continue Wild Horse Plans of Previous Administration on May 25.
Seems like the pendulum only swings one way in the wild horse world.
You’ll have to visit areas set aside for wild horses to see that.
But there will probably be exhibits from other ranching advocacy groups.
RELATED: WSHE Still Set for June 11-13.
Family bands torn apart by helicopters.
Adopted horses dumped at kill pens.
Unwanted animals languishing in off-range corrals.
These problems could be avoided with contraceptives, according to the writer of an opinion piece in this evening’s online edition of the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Why not end permitted grazing and shift the resources back to the horses?
That would be bad for the ranchers and those in the PZP supply chain.
Last month, you bought a five bedroom home but just found out that four of the bedrooms have been reserved for illegal aliens.
Therefore, your wife needs to go on birth control to make sure your family does not outgrow its allocated share of the dwelling, previously referred to as ‘your house.’
Are you going to accept that?
The writer of a guest column in today’s edition of The Salt Lake Tribune does, only he’s talking about lands set aside for wild horses, not five bedroom homes.
Look at the citations under Authority on pages 7 and 8 of the Decision Record. Most of them refer to federal regulations—rules invented by the unelected bureaucracy, not the people’s representatives.
The bureaucrats never have to face the voters. Are they accessible to special interests?
This may explain why public policy—at least in the wild horse world—doesn’t reflect the will of the American people.
A story in today’s online edition of the Tampa Bay Times highlights some of the horses and volunteers at the Wild Horse Rescue Center in Webster, FL.
Anybody who understands the reports and calculations on these pages knows the land can support way more than 27,000 wild horses and who’s getting rich at their expense.
RELATED: Adoption Incentive Fallout?
Refer to this 26-minute interview by KDNK Radio of Carbondale, CO, featuring the director of the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses. Audio only, no transcript.
The host seems to know more about the subject than the guest.
The darting program mentioned at the end of the segment, which is harmless according to the advocates, is on the Virginia Range.
RELATED: Undeniable Truths of the Wild Horse World.
Congress should direct the BLM use a proposed funding increase to begin a robust and sustainable fertility control program for wild horses and burros, according to a news release by Return to Freedom, signatory to the rancher-friendly ‘Path Forward.’
These animals are federally protected, but most of their food has been assigned to privately owned livestock, so we need to reduce their numbers. Humanely, of course.
RELATED: Undeniable Truths of the Wild Horse World.
If public-lands ranching is the problem (which it is) and wild horses are not overpopulated (which they aren’t), then why not halt the darting effort as well?
The letter, linked to yesterday’s news release by Animal Wellness Action, calls for a moratorium on non-emergency gathers and removals of wild horses and burros until the BLM conducts a comprehensive review of its wild horse and burro program and the impacts of private livestock grazing.
Why would you want to review the WHB program and the consequences of permitted grazing? They are effects—too late, too far downstream in the management process.
You have to look upstream for causes, such as resource allocations and the land-use plans where they originate, as well as the statutes, regulations, attitudes, beliefs and external influences that precede them.
Solutions are always aimed at causes, not effects. Treating the symptoms can only prolong the problem.
As the publicity and propaganda surrounding the Onaqui roundup escalate, it’s time to state the obvious:
1. The greatest threat to America’s wild horses is public-lands ranching.
2. The advocates, with their darting programs, are #2.
3. The impact of drilling and mining, compared to #1 and #2, is negligible.
The advocates are getting rid of more wild horses than drillers, miners, loggers, hikers, campers, motorists, shooters and predators ever could.
As usual, the advocates want darting programs, not helicopter roundups, according to a story in today’s edition of Deseret News.
Livestock grazing should be limited to protect the ecosystem, not to shift the resources back to the horses.
The next roundup is set for July per the latest schedule.
RELATED: Running the Onaqui Numbers.
A report published yesterday by Gray DC, the Washington news bureau for Gray Television Inc, says the new but illegitimate administration agrees with the approach of the Trump administration, which features helicopter roundups and fertility controls.
“We’re going to let the science guide us.”
A spokesman for the Nevada Farm Bureau, a front group for ranching interests, applauded the decision.
Bringing equine populations down to AML means livestock operators will receive most of the resources in areas set aside for wild horses and burros.
The advocates will argue that the best way to get rid of the animals is contraceptives, not roundups, oblivious to the lopsided resource allocations they’ll be helping to achieve.
As for the science, you only need to look at the numbers in the EAs and RMPs and be able to compute some basic management indicators to know what the problem is.
RELATED: Will Letter to Haaland About Livestock Grazing Do Any Good?
The ‘harem hopper’ was finally spotted with a youngster from another band, according a story posted today by The Charlotte Observer.
Don’t worry, she’s not trying to steal the foal and the behavior has nothing to do with the darting program.
The studs, also confused, can’t understand why the mares aren’t bearing more fruit.
RELATED: Foal #6 Appears on Currituck Outer Banks.
Probably not. Elimination of livestock grazing in wild horse areas will likely originate in the judiciary, not in the bureaucracy and not in the legislature.
Last year, at the urging of the advocates, the politicians offered an exciting new alternative to helicopter roundups: Get rid of the horses with contraceptives.
These animals are being forced off the range because most of their food had been sold to public-lands ranchers, not because there are too many of them.
Although the letter has the right idea, Western Horse Watchers believes that its scope is too narrow. The absence of certain signatories should be of great interest.
RELATED: Letter to Haaland Seeks Thriving Ecological Balance?
The story last week by The New York Times about the $1,000 adoption incentive, and the ‘unintended’ consequences associated therewith, fueled the debate about the best way to get rid of wild horses. No surprise that the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses was involved.
Subsequent coverage, such as this report by KLAS News, gives them an opportunity to push their ruinous fertility control programs.
They’re not questioning if the horses need to be removed, only if it can be done ‘humanely.’
“We’re calling it ‘slaughtergate.’ It happens about every decade,” Roy shared. “The BLM gets exposed to sending wild horses, federally protected wild horses and burrows [sic] to slaughter. And the reason this keeps happening is because the BLM keeps rounding up wild horses.”
Why won’t they look upstream in the wild horse management process? Why aren’t they interested in resource allocations and management priorities in wild horse areas?
Because the data would show that many of them are not overpopulated. They have too many cattle and sheep, not too many horses.
The argument in favor of fertility control would fall to the ground—and that’s not good for business.
RELATED: Adoption Incentive Backfiring or Working Exactly as Planned?
An advisory council, consisting of four individuals with expertise in business, law, conservation and Native American traditions, has been established for the project, according to a news release dated May 20.
Additional members will be announced in the next few weeks.
The proposed facility would be located in South Dakota.
The announcement concludes with a note about the organization’s research that led to a model for managing wild horses based on the idea of stable family bands.
Western Horse Watchers agrees with the concept and believes it warrants further study.
However, an email sent to ISPMB on March 6, asking for a link to the reports, which were to be published by the end of 2018 according to the second paragraph in a rebuttal of criticisms regarding conditions at the ranch in 2016, was never answered.
RELATED: ISPMB Building Heritage Center?
Western Horse Watchers Association 