Saddle Sores

I thought Audubon would present factual information, not bias and scorn packaged as journalism.

America's wild horses are not feral, they are a reintroduced native species. The horse originated in North America, nowhere else. Ross MacPhee, curator of the Department of Mammalogy at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, said the mustangs are classified as Equus caballus, which “evolved from more primitive forebears” in North America. “There is therefore no question that it is `native’ within any reasonable meaning of that word – much more so than bison, for example, whose immediate ancestry is Asian,” MacPhee said. “Yes, it disappeared from our shores for a few thousand years, but that has no bearing scientifically on whether it is historically `native.” Bighorn sheep evolved in Asia and migrated here recently compared to the horse yet you refer to them as sensitive desert creatures and consider them native. That seems to happen with species that hunters prefer.

"A feral horse is a far greater threat to native ecosystems than a cow." That is an outright lie and downplays the fact that cows are on public lands in numbers 42 times greater than the equid population. Apparently you aren't listening to the conservation scientists who have said for decades that cattle are the problem on the public lands. It also seems that you fail to understand that the 1971 Act that gave the wild horses & burros their territory made horses the principle in those protected areas, so in those areas the livestock should be removed first if there is a resource conflict. The 1971 act gave the horses 54M acres of public land which has been reduced to 31M acres by BLM. By your reasoning, 75,000 horses (includes the horses in holding) is too much for 31M acres to bear, yet 3M livestock on 160M acres is not much of a problem for existing wildlife? In Adobe Town & Salt Wells, even 2500 horses is not too many for 1.6M acres. Did the BLM mention how much they spend on predator control to protect the livestock of the welfare ranchers? Those natural predators, left in place, could help naturally maintain equid populations. But BLM is there for the ranchers and DOI, not science, law, or even common sense.

The condition of the land should determine overpopulation. The ALM is an arbitrary number that has very little to do with actual range conditions. BLM has increased authorized livestock grazing levels after removing horses. Dr. Patricia Muir, Director of Oregon State University's Environmental Sciences Undergraduate Program: "This emphasis by the BLM on grazing use over other uses is typical: of the range improvement monies that BLM can account for since 1980, 96.5% were used to benefit livestock. Major challenges to BLM's and Forest Service's management practices are actually coming from the courts rather than from changed legislation… For example, a coalition of environmentalists and others brought suit against the BLM over grazing in five canyons in Utah, and a Federal judge stopped grazing on those allotments. The judge decided that BLM had violated and even defied federal law in administering the grazing permits there. Grazing was banned there until an approved environmental impact statement is completed, and it is demonstrated that grazing is in the best interests of the canyons and the public. The same kind of thing happened in the Stanley Basin in the Sawtooth National Recreation Area in ID, where a suit brought by a coalition of fishermen and environmentalists was successful in requiring that 2/3 of the cattle be removed from the area."

2009 Elk - 950,000 (only in the 10 states with wild horse & burro AMLs)
2009 Pronghorn Antelope - 780,808 min (only in the 10 states with wild horse & burro AMLs)
2008 Bighorn Sheep - 70,000
2009 Wild Horse & Burro AML - 26,831

Wyoming:
WY Wild Horse AML (2008): 3,725 (0.4%)
WY Bighorn Sheep (2000): 6,483 (0.6%)
WY Elk (2009): 95,000 (9.4%)
WY Pronghorn Antelope (2006): 300,000 (29.8%)
WY Mule Deer (2005): 480,000 (47.6%)
WY Livestock Authorized Use/Cattle (2009): 122,706 (12.2%) *
WY Livestock Actual Use/Cattle (2009): 57,115 (6.1%) *
* Calculated using BLMs 2009 WY Livestock Authorization Rpt of annual forage as represented by AUMs and divided by 12 to represent the potential head of cattle as expressed through year-round grazing.

There are BLM offices and contractors that do care about the horses so I hope that is what you observed. However, if you aren't experienced with equines you may not recognize subtler forms of abusive handling or if you are biased, you may ignore it completely. If you've watched the many many videos of the choppers who come extremely close the horses, run them quite hard in both cold & hot weather, or even hit the horses & burros with their skids you would understand the reason so many horse lovers are concerned about these wild horses being treated like they are brainless livestock.

former Audubon admirer

I don't know if your analogy of horse behavior compared to a cow is true or not, I have owned horses and workd with them, I assure you they dont eat to the dirt, sheep do, my goats used to, but not the horses. they only do that when they are confined or unable to get to fresh forage and are starving. horses do not stay in a area devoid of vegetation, they are movers, they move over vast areas more than cattle even do.

it is my understanding that cows number into the millions, and horses only arond 50,000 or less. I don't see how 50,000 can cause the death of so many wild animals. i like my beef don't get me wrong, the range is vast enough for everyone and I cant imagine a person who relies on the range for their livlihood would abuse it or mismanage it unless it suffers from the tragedy of the commons.. a person who owns something will take better care than say someone who only temprorarily leases it to get resources before moving on like some mega corporations do.

and as for the sheep they can get to areas cattle and horses cannot. so I don't see how horses are relevant to their survival, now if you speak of hunters poachers and damage to the enviroment due to corporate interests then maybe you might, and I say might, have something. the western areas are so vast and so unpredictable as to climate, weather patterns growth etc, I bet if the horses were not there the animals would still suffer setbacks. it is the nature of well let's just say it nature. I am sure cattle do more damage then horses simply because there are more of them, but not being expert here I don't know for sure, but I don't see why cattle or horses are any less worthy of existing or living off the land then any other animal. let all culling be based on real science and not on emotional rhetroic.

I am also aware of cattle associations interests that deride the horses and are making up or fabricating teh effects of the wild horses to get support from the public to remove them. more and more I get the impression that the real issue on many enviromental issues is not enviromental protection at all but simply a way to get around the united states constitution of due process and just compensation and the like. resource or land grab if you will.

there are real enviromental concerns that are being ignored, like the dumping by the us military of tons of military wastes into the oceans and dumping of trash on thrid world nations by the mega corporations who are in bed with the us government. these seem to be ignored by enviromentalists. the enviromentalists seem to target only the little guy business man, or those who do not have connections with gove or who cant fight back or who are holding lands coveting by others who want to use enviromental concerns to push them off the land using economic sabatage. like the outer banks of nc. forests lands in the west using the spotted owl fiasco to destroy competitors of lumber companies who finance enviromental groups. you all(remember I am not sure who is who) seem to be targeting small enviromental concerns when there is a vast more important issues like corporations polluting vastly in areas out west, like the one area where a corp mined there and left the toxic pollution for the locals to clean up i believe it was wisconsin or minnesota, why are you not all there crying over that? stick to the bigger issues that affect millions of people and animals and deal with the local issues later..

we are as much a part of the earth as animals, and believe me you I love animals too. now if there is a problem with animals that are diminishing into dangerous low levels I say work with people of the area, give them fair hearing, pay them a fair price for the loss of use, use kindness and real concern for all concerns, not the courts using force of the state to push it down people's throats, if your right that a situation is dire then show people something, don't go behind their backs and use lies and fabrications like piping plover fiasco, you do know they breed in teh northern plains and northern east coast don't you? so what is up with the outer banks thing? please don't declare war with people in the name of animals, after all humans have as much right here as the animals. if you care about animals do not exaggerate a problem in order to get support. be honest and realistic and fair to all concerned. thanks.

rosa