The Chincoteague Volunteer Fire Company will donate the proceeds from a Buy-Back filly to the museum’s effort to purchase the ranch, according to an announcement by Sport Horse Auctions, coordinator of the auction that follows the annual swim.

Bidding starts today and runs through June 14.

Buy-Back foals are usually returned to the Virginia side of Assateague Island after the event in late July, but this auction may be occurring now because the museum is in contract with a closing date of June 30.

RELATED: Chincoteague Museum Puts Contract on Beebe Ranch.

The WBR is one of four HMAs, out of 177, where animal agriculture is not allowed.

On May 9, the BLM opened a new project in ePlanning that initiated a land health assessment for the Basalt, Belleville, Little Huntoon and McBride Flat Allotments, to evaluate their potential for livestock grazing and other uses.

A scoping letter was the only document posted for public review.

Basalt and McBride Flat are in the Sierra Front Field Office.  The Allotment Master Report shows no permittees and no active AUMs.

Belleville and Little Huntoon are in the Stillwater Field Office.  The Allotment Master Report shows no permittees and no active AUMs.

Three are in the Maintain category and one is Custodial (condition unknown).

Belleville intersects the WBR according to the National Data Viewer.  Click on image to open in new tab.

If the allotments are found to be suitable for animal agriculture (the answer may already known), additional planning and decisions would be required, including an EA or EIS in a new project, to revise the applicable RMP(s) and reallocate or reauthorize resources.

The Montgomery Pass HMA may also be affected.

It’s possible the allotment boundaries could be shifted to eliminate the overlap, but history suggests the WHB areas will be sacrificed for the benefit of permitted grazing.

The project may have been instigated by ranching interests, but this was not specified in the description.

Comments will be accepted through June 16.

Of the two leading fertility control pesticides, both on the same EPA list as toxic chemicals, the advocates have a clear preference, Zonastat-H, indicated by comments on the proposed livestock management plan for Theodore Roosevelt National Park.

As for injection site reactions, these photos show injuries inflicted by volunteers with the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses on the Virginia Range.  Click on images to open in new tabs.

Previous photos show injuries that persist for weeks and get worse with time.  They were caused by Zonastat-laced darts, fired by the same nitwits for the same group.

When the product is used for herd reduction, as it is on the Salt River and Virginia Range, the inevitable result is sterility, as the advocates, desperate to convince the bureaucrats and ranchers that they have a better way, pummel the mares for an extended period to achieve their population goals.

This is what happened on the Maryland side of Assateague Island, where the pesticide was applied with reckless abandon for over twenty years.

RELATED: Foal-Free Friday, Snubbing the Advocates Edition.

Public opinion regarding the new livestock management plan tilted 63 to 1 in opposition to their removal, according to a story dated June 6 by INFORUM.

A keyword search of the comment report yielded nine occurrences of “PZP” and eight occurrences of “birth control.”

The report provides summaries of comments, so the frequency of such ideas in the original comment pool is likely much higher.

The following snippets reveal a misinformed public, an indication of how far the advocates have propagated their lies.

From Section 3.8:

Safe, proven and reversible?  Nonsense!

Also from Section 3.8:

Yep, abnormal sex ratios peddled as mares living longer.

In the seven years since the Assateague darting program was shut off, the herd has not bounced back, proving that the safe, proven and reversible fertility control pesticide is anything but.

Pay no attention to the advocates!

Their top priority is to keep their base fired up and the donations rolling in, while achieving nothing useful for America’s wild horses.

RELATED: TRNP Mares Sterile?

Q. What do you call a woman who couldn’t convert an AML to AUMs if her life depended on it, much less compute a forage allocation for livestock in an area set aside for wild horses, but graduated with honors from the Billings School of PZP Darting?

A. An advocate.

Q. What do you call a ranching advocacy group that recruits dozens of such women every year to poison wild mares with restricted-use pesticides?

A. The Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses.

Q. Who should you call if you see said women applying said pesticides in areas used for animal agriculture, a purpose for which they were not registered?

A. Law enforcement.

RELATED: More Wild Horse FAQs.

A new project was created in ePlanning yesterday, covering bait trap removal of 150 wild burros from private lands inside the HMA.

Operations run from June through September.  Click on image to open in new tab.

Refer to the CX for details.

The incident does not appear in the latest schedule.

There were no opportunities for public involvement.

The project was not announced at the BLM news site.

The HMA is subject to animal agriculture, with allotments shown in green.

The effort was announced in a news release dated June 5.

How do you know HR 3656 is bad for wild horses?  The advocates support it.

They see it as an opportunity to expand their fertility control businesses.

As for the new site, sign the petition if it means areas identified for wild horses will be managed principally for them, as specified in the original statute, but say no to any measure that calls for the poisoning of mares with ovary-killing pesticides.

RELATED: It’s Back: Helicopter Ban for 2023.

Q. What do you call a wild horse removal contractor masquerading as an advocacy group?

A. The Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses.

Q. What do you call an EPA-registered pesticide that can only be used on female horses and burros that are capable of doing environmental damage?

A. Zonastat-H.

Q. What do you call the application of said pesticide by said group on herds that pose a safety hazard or are thought to be overpopulated?

A. Illegal.

RELATED: Wild Horse FAQs.

In the eastern Sierra with Jim Brumfield.

A story dated June 2 by Courthouse News takes a closer look at the debate, but two issues deserve further attention.

Hypocrisy of the advocates—

Simone Netherlands, president of the Salt River Wild Horse Darting Group, said removing horses from public land is “ungrateful” behavior given their significant role in American history.

What is she doing with the aid of her volunteers?  Getting rid of wild horses on public lands with an ovary-killing pesticide.

Silence about permitted grazing—

Wherever you find wild horses you’ll find permitted garzing, with few exceptions.

Horses appear in the North American fossil record but cattle and sheep do not, yet horses are cited as the nonnative/invasive species.

RELATED: Salt River Advocates Accuse Forest Service of Harming Foals!

The June meeting in Reno of the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board offered two opportunities to observe the poisoning of mares with fertility control pesticides, but the BLM opted to visit the Blue Wing Complex instead.

Why didn’t they choose the Virginia Range or Pine Nut Mountains, where advocates affiliated with the Campaign Against America’s Wild Horses are suppressing the herds for the benefit of animal agriculture, a purpose for which PZP was not registered?

Desperate for acceptance and approval, the advocates could explain their philosophy of managing the numbers to fit what’s available for the horses: As the bureaucrats shift more acreage and food to the public-lands ranchers, wild horse numbers must go down, and they have a better way.

On the other hand, Board members accompanied by plain-clothes law enforcement agents could gather information leading to the arrest and conviction of those involved.

If done amicably, they might even go home with “Stay Wild” caps worn by participants and supporters of the programs.

RELATED: Foal-Free Friday, Reinforcing the Status Quo Edition.

The debt ceiling bill cleared the House last night by a vote of 314-117.

A keyword search of the pdf yielded these results:

• Horse – 0 occurrences
• Burro – 0
• Advocate – 0
• Pesticide – 0
• Livestock – 0
• Allotment – 0
• Grazing – 0
• Forage – 0
• Cattle – 0
• Sheep – 0
• AUM – 0
• RMP – 0
• BLM – 0
• PZP – 0

Looks like it won’t have a big effect on the wild horse world, at least not directly.

The privately owned off-range pasture west of Laramie, WY will open its doors to the public on June 10, according to a story dated May 30 by This Is Laramie.

The ranch, listed as “Centennial” in the Off-Range Facilities Report, has a capacity of 350 excess animals, horses displaced from their lawful homes by permitted grazing.

It was threatened but not damaged by the Mullen Fire in 2020.

The Draft EA for pest control actions in the Owyhee Front states in Section 1.1 that the HMA intersects the Hardtrigger, Rabbit Creek and East Reynolds Creek allotments.

The National Data Viewer indicates a small amount of overlap on the west side with the Reynolds Creek allotment but that will be ignored.

The HMA covers 50,904 total acres in western Idaho, including 47,434 public acres, according to the 2023 HA/HMA Report.

The 60 horses allowed by plan require 720 AUMs per year.

The stocking rate allowed by plan is 1.3 wild horses per thousand public acres.

The current population is thought to be 104, according to Table 1 in the EA, plus this year’s foal crop.

There are three layers of forage demand in the HMA: Horses, livestock and wildlife.

• The carrying capacity of the HMA, referred to on these pages as the True AML, depends on the horse and livestock layers
• The True AML represents the number of horses the HMA could support if it was managed principally for them, as specified in the original statute
• Overpopulation means more horses than allowed by plan, not necessarily more horses than the land can support
• The livestock layer represents horses displaced from their lawful home by permitted grazing, now in off-range holding
• The allotments mean the HMA is used for animal agriculture, a purpose for which the fertility control pesticides were not registered
• Persons who apply the products in this manner should be investigated by law enforcement, along with those who authorize them
• The “vaccines” are on the same EPA list as toxic chemicals

The Allotment Master Report provides acreage, management status and active AUMs.

The allotments are in the Improve category.

They offer a weighted-average 62.3 AUMs per year per thousand public acres, equivalent to 5.2 wild horses per thousand public acres.

This is on top of the 1.3 wild horses allowed by plan.

Therefore, the True AML should be around (1.3 + 5.2) × 47,434 ÷ 1,000 = 308, 5.1 times higher than the current AML.

The stocking rate at the new AML would be 1.3 + 5.2 = 6.5 wild horses per thousand public acres, considerably higher than the target rate of one wild horse per thousand acres associated with a thriving ecological balance (27,000 animals on 27 million acres).

The number of horses displaced by permitted grazing is 308 – 60 = 248, about 0.4% of those in off-range holding.

If you performed this analysis for every HA/HMA/WHT—better yet, the government reported the forage assigned to livestock in every HA/HMA/WHT—you’d find that all of the off-range corrals and long-term pastures could be emptied several times over by ending permitted grazing in areas identified for wild horses.

The HMA is managed primarily for animal agriculture, with livestock receiving 80% of the authorized forage, neglecting wildlife.

In a nutshell, the land-use plan allows 60 wild horses in the HMA, plus livestock equivalent to 248 cow/calf pairs, seven days a week, twelve months per year.

The True AML can be achieved by confining the ranchers to their base properties in a year-round off season.

The Wild Horse Fire Brigade, established by a rancher for the benefit of ranchers, would move the horses to a remote wilderness area not particularly suited to livestock grazing, giving the permittees access to all of their food.

RELATED: Owyhee Resource Enforcement Plan Out for Review.

Story by WCSH News of Portland.

RELATED: Idaho Mustangs Arrive in Oregon After Journey from Maine.

Horses have the day off.  At or near the Bullfrog HMA with Nomad Xtena.

The HMA intersects the Elephant Butte, Rats Nest, Reynolds Creek, Shares Basin and Hardtrigger allotments, as stated in Section 1.1 of the Draft EA for pest control actions in the Owyhee Front.

The National Data Viewer shows the arrangement.  Click on image to open in new tab.

The allotments represent another layer of forage demand in the HMA, probably the largest, in addition to that of wildlife and wild horses.

• The carrying capacity of the HMA, referred to on these pages as the True AML, depends on the wild horse and livestock layers
• The True AML represents the number of horses the HMA could support if it was managed principally for them, as Velma and the 92nd Congress intended
• Overpopulation means more horses than allowed by plan, not necessarily more horses than the land can support
• The livestock layer represents horses displaced from their lawful home, now stockpiled in off-range holding
• The allotments mean the HMA is subject to animal agriculture, a purpose for which the fertility control pesticides were not registered
• Those who apply the products in this manner should be investigated, along with those who authorize them

Tables 5 and 6 in the EA refer to the Wildcat allotment, not Rats Nest, and include two other allotments that overlap the HMA in negligible amounts.

The HMA covers 69,910 total acres in western Idaho, including 62,149 public acres, according to the 2023 HA/HMA Report.

The 130 horses allowed by plan require 1,560 AUMs per year.

The stocking rate allowed by plan is 2.1 wild horses per thousand public acres.

The Allotment Master Report provides acreage, management status and active AUMs.

All five allotments are in the Improve category.

The allotments offer a weighted-average 96.5 AUMs per year per thousand public acres, equivalent to eight wild horses per thousand public acres.

This is on top of the 2.1 wild horses allowed by plan!

Therefore, the True AML should be around (8.0 + 2.1) × 62,149 ÷ 1,000 = 628, 4.8 times higher than the current AML.

The current population is thought to be 101, plus this year’s foal crop, according to Table 1 in the EA.

The number of horses displaced from the HMA by permitted grazing is 628 – 130 = 498, about 0.8% of those in off-range holding.

The HMA is managed primarily for animal agriculture, with livestock receiving 79% of the authorized forage, neglecting wildlife.

In a nutshell, the land-use plan allows 130 wild horses and livestock equivalent to 498 cow/calf pairs in the HMA, seven days a week, twelve months per year.

The True AML can be achieved by confining the ranchers to their base properties in a year-round off season.

The Wild Horse Fire Brigade would move the horses to a remote wilderness area, not particularly suited to livestock grazing, giving the ranchers access to all of their food.

The HMA does not have an HMAP.  If it did, the document would comply with the forage allocations above.

RELATED: Owyhee Resource Enforcement Plan Out for Review.

Participants must register in advance according to today’s news release.

The Complex lies within the massive Blue Wing / Seven Troughs Allotment.

Only one of the four permittees will be active on the date of the tour.

The other three are in their off seasons.

You may want to ask your tour guide how resources have been allocated between wild horses, livestock and wildlife.

Five HMAs are affected.

RELATED: WHBAB Meeting Returning to Traditional Format.

A new report shows economic output on BLM lands in FY 2021.

It was announced in a blog post dated May 23.

Which states lead the way in each category?

• Grazing – Idaho
• Timber – Oregon/Washington
• Recreation – Utah
• Renewables – California
• Coal – Wyoming
• Nonenergy Minerals – Nevada
• Oil and Gas – New Mexico

The least valuable use of public lands, in terms of economic output, is livestock grazing and the greatest is oil and gas production.  Click on image to open in new tab.

An interesting exercise would be to compute economic output per acre used and show the results in a bar graph.

Only three comments have been received as of this morning.

Why not three thousand as at McCullough Peaks and Pryor Mountain?

Perhaps they don’t see any opportunities for the Montana Solution.

RELATED: Sand Wash Permanent Trap Site Rolls Out This Summer.