By now you may have heard something to the effect that BLM is planning to euthanize all of the 45,000 wild horses and burros currently in long and short term holding. This would not be surprising because this is not a new idea from BLM. Over several months in 2008, BLM discussed euthanasia as a way to reduce the numbers of animals in holding. The discussion proposed euthanizing horses over 20 at the time of round up and offering younger horses for adoption for just 30 days before euthanizing them.
This time, however, it wasn’t actually BLM, but the BLM’s National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board that proposed, “To follow the stipulations of the Wild Horse and Burro Act by offering all suitable animals in long and short term holding deemed unadoptable for sale without limitation or humane euthanasia. Those animals deemed unsuitable for sale should then be destroyed in the most humane manner possible." For sale “without limitation” essentially means horses can be purchased directly for slaughter. Everyone on the board, with the exception of Ginger Kathrens - who has spent decades studying and documenting the horses of the Pryor Mountains - voted in favor of this recommendation at their last meeting on September 9th.
Ben Masters, known for his film Unbranded (funded by the Mustang Heritage Foundation), chairs the Adoption committee for the advisory board along with Ginger Kathrens, June Sewing, and Fred Woehl. Ben laments the fact that his attempt to get horses adopted through his film “failed to make a significant dent in the short and long term holding pens”. He feels that BLM should make it easier for people to obtain horses by doing away with that pesky “red-tape paperwork-filled” adoption process, and sending horses to more frequent adoption events to make them sale-authority eligible quicker. This would make more horses at risk of being bought for slaughter, something he claims he is against. He also thinks that AMLs should be studied only AFTER “population growth has been successfully suppressed.” Isn’t that backwards? June Sewing, the executive director of the National Mustang Association, was quoted by the Elko Daily Free Press as saying “I would like to see them put some more pressure to get more funds to do more gathers.” Really?
No doubt in reaction to all the bad publicity they must be getting, Neil Kornze, head of BLM, announced that they would NOT be following the Advisory Board’s recommendation to euthanize all of the horses in holding, or to offer them for sale “without limitation”. Ben Masters may have gotten one thing right when he said, “The publicity and outrage our recommendation will [create] could FINALLY make congress realize what a tremendous disaster the WH&B program is and get some funding and attention to address this massive problem.” The fact is that the BLM has grossly mismanaged the Wild Horse and Burro Program. This disaster is of their own creation, and the best advice they can get is to kill all of the horses in holding so they can make room to round up more horses.
Rather than suggesting or even entertaining viable, long-term alternatives to roundups, and in response to the BLM canceling the spay experiments, the Advisory Board basically threw a temper tantrum.
Current BLM management practices have actually contributed to higher rates of population growth, while reducing the genetic viability of many herds. The BLM needs to get serious about accurately determining the number of horses on the range as well as appropriate, not arbitrarily low AMLs, and stop blaming range degradation on the horses who are vastly outnumbered by cattle and sheep. This needs to be done before there can be any management plan put into place. It’s a real no-brainer, but they can start by studying herds such as the Montgomery Pass herd that maintain a stable population. The current goal of “static to decreasing population levels” through sterilization will only lead to the eventual elimination of wild horses on the range, not “healthy horses on healthy range lands”.
When BLM discussed euthanasia in 2008, they discussed other solutions. One of them was paying “livestock operators who allow non-reproducing wild-horses to be maintained on their allotments. BLM would buy livestock permits with the objective of managing the allotment(s) for a non-reproducing herd.” They also discussed “putting horses on public lands that did not exist in 1971 . . . Because they would be non-reproducing herd[s] the intent of the law would be followed. The horses would still be considered as wild free-roaming wild horses.” Why hasn’t this been explored further? This could help alleviate some of the overcrowding in holding, and put horses back out on the range. If it’s necessary to change the laws to make this happen, then it’s time to change the laws.
But the reality is that the mission of the BLM – to regulate grazing on public lands – is at direct odds with protecting our wild horses and burros. BLM’s mission also has a detrimental impact on bison, apex predators, and any other wildlife ranchers deem to be in conflict with grazing livestock. But it’s just not fiscally responsible to subsidize ranchers to graze livestock on public lands while at the same time spend tax payer money to kill wildlife on those same public lands and remove the horses then pay other ranchers to warehouse them. It’s high time to seriously talk about removing cattle and sheep from public lands, reintroducing predators, and allowing the ecosystems to get back into balance, which would help keep wild horse numbers in check naturally. BLM and ranchers could explore eco-tourism as a way to offset potential loss of revenue if necessary.
This is a far better solution than endless roundups and the threats of sterilization and death. It’s better than managing them into extinction. And it’s better than the false choice presented by the Advisory Board: either sell the horses without limitation, which would subject them to being sent to slaughter, or to prevent that, euthanize the horses, because that would be more “humane”.
Please write to your elected officials and let them know you are tired of the way BLM has been managing the Wild Horse and Burro Program, and want them to come up with better solutions, including getting accurate counts, creating more realistic AML's, removing livestock from public lands, reintroducing predators, buying livestock permits, and putting horses on public land not existing in 1971.
This time, however, it wasn’t actually BLM, but the BLM’s National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board that proposed, “To follow the stipulations of the Wild Horse and Burro Act by offering all suitable animals in long and short term holding deemed unadoptable for sale without limitation or humane euthanasia. Those animals deemed unsuitable for sale should then be destroyed in the most humane manner possible." For sale “without limitation” essentially means horses can be purchased directly for slaughter. Everyone on the board, with the exception of Ginger Kathrens - who has spent decades studying and documenting the horses of the Pryor Mountains - voted in favor of this recommendation at their last meeting on September 9th.
Ben Masters, known for his film Unbranded (funded by the Mustang Heritage Foundation), chairs the Adoption committee for the advisory board along with Ginger Kathrens, June Sewing, and Fred Woehl. Ben laments the fact that his attempt to get horses adopted through his film “failed to make a significant dent in the short and long term holding pens”. He feels that BLM should make it easier for people to obtain horses by doing away with that pesky “red-tape paperwork-filled” adoption process, and sending horses to more frequent adoption events to make them sale-authority eligible quicker. This would make more horses at risk of being bought for slaughter, something he claims he is against. He also thinks that AMLs should be studied only AFTER “population growth has been successfully suppressed.” Isn’t that backwards? June Sewing, the executive director of the National Mustang Association, was quoted by the Elko Daily Free Press as saying “I would like to see them put some more pressure to get more funds to do more gathers.” Really?
No doubt in reaction to all the bad publicity they must be getting, Neil Kornze, head of BLM, announced that they would NOT be following the Advisory Board’s recommendation to euthanize all of the horses in holding, or to offer them for sale “without limitation”. Ben Masters may have gotten one thing right when he said, “The publicity and outrage our recommendation will [create] could FINALLY make congress realize what a tremendous disaster the WH&B program is and get some funding and attention to address this massive problem.” The fact is that the BLM has grossly mismanaged the Wild Horse and Burro Program. This disaster is of their own creation, and the best advice they can get is to kill all of the horses in holding so they can make room to round up more horses.
Rather than suggesting or even entertaining viable, long-term alternatives to roundups, and in response to the BLM canceling the spay experiments, the Advisory Board basically threw a temper tantrum.
Current BLM management practices have actually contributed to higher rates of population growth, while reducing the genetic viability of many herds. The BLM needs to get serious about accurately determining the number of horses on the range as well as appropriate, not arbitrarily low AMLs, and stop blaming range degradation on the horses who are vastly outnumbered by cattle and sheep. This needs to be done before there can be any management plan put into place. It’s a real no-brainer, but they can start by studying herds such as the Montgomery Pass herd that maintain a stable population. The current goal of “static to decreasing population levels” through sterilization will only lead to the eventual elimination of wild horses on the range, not “healthy horses on healthy range lands”.
When BLM discussed euthanasia in 2008, they discussed other solutions. One of them was paying “livestock operators who allow non-reproducing wild-horses to be maintained on their allotments. BLM would buy livestock permits with the objective of managing the allotment(s) for a non-reproducing herd.” They also discussed “putting horses on public lands that did not exist in 1971 . . . Because they would be non-reproducing herd[s] the intent of the law would be followed. The horses would still be considered as wild free-roaming wild horses.” Why hasn’t this been explored further? This could help alleviate some of the overcrowding in holding, and put horses back out on the range. If it’s necessary to change the laws to make this happen, then it’s time to change the laws.
But the reality is that the mission of the BLM – to regulate grazing on public lands – is at direct odds with protecting our wild horses and burros. BLM’s mission also has a detrimental impact on bison, apex predators, and any other wildlife ranchers deem to be in conflict with grazing livestock. But it’s just not fiscally responsible to subsidize ranchers to graze livestock on public lands while at the same time spend tax payer money to kill wildlife on those same public lands and remove the horses then pay other ranchers to warehouse them. It’s high time to seriously talk about removing cattle and sheep from public lands, reintroducing predators, and allowing the ecosystems to get back into balance, which would help keep wild horse numbers in check naturally. BLM and ranchers could explore eco-tourism as a way to offset potential loss of revenue if necessary.
This is a far better solution than endless roundups and the threats of sterilization and death. It’s better than managing them into extinction. And it’s better than the false choice presented by the Advisory Board: either sell the horses without limitation, which would subject them to being sent to slaughter, or to prevent that, euthanize the horses, because that would be more “humane”.
Please write to your elected officials and let them know you are tired of the way BLM has been managing the Wild Horse and Burro Program, and want them to come up with better solutions, including getting accurate counts, creating more realistic AML's, removing livestock from public lands, reintroducing predators, buying livestock permits, and putting horses on public land not existing in 1971.
RSS Feed
