BLM proposes mass killing of wild horses

[medicine hat]

has anybody else heard about this? thought I'd post a link incase anybody is interested~
http://tuesdayshorse.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/blm-proposes-mass-killing-of-americas-wild-horses-and-burros-us/

[Remali]

The link wouldn't work for me. I sure hope they aren't planning on doing something like that, sure would be a step backwards if it is true.

[medicine hat]

http://tuesdayshorse.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/blm-proposes-mass-killing-of-americas-wild-horses-and-burros-us/ (http://tuesdayshorse.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/blm-proposes-mass-killing-of-americas-wild-horses-and-burros-us/)>

maybe this time it will work, sorry~

[Remali]

Thanks, it worked for me now.

Sad. They need to come up with a better plan than that, killing off animals is a cop-out in my opinion.

[medicine hat]

I know there is an overpopulation~ no easy answers here.
but if the BLM is not being honest about how many wild horses are estimated on their lands, then they don't need to be rounding them up just to kill them, right? why not leave some more of them?

[Remali]

I know...it sounds like they're unorganized. I hope they can come up with a better plan. After all, we humans put the horses there in the first place.

[Annasmom]

wow. this ia a really hard issue im not too sure how I feel but I think maybe they could do something more preventative. is gelding some a stupid idea.

[Horserider]

This infuriates me. I'm trying to contain my rant inside my head. First of us this is all our fault and yet as always the animals are suffering for it. It's our fault the horses were even introduced. It's our fault that they don't have enough land. It's all our fault and yet we want to kill them. Notice how no one says we should kick the farmers of their land? Notice how we don't tell the land developers to just shut up and get a real job? Why isn't that an option?

[WashingtonBay]

This infuriates me. I'm trying to contain my rant inside my head. First of us this is all our fault and yet as always the animals are suffering for it. It's our fault the horses were even introduced. It's our fault that they don't have enough land. It's all our fault and yet we want to kill them. Notice how no one says we should kick the farmers of their land? Notice how we don't tell the land developers to just shut up and get a real job? Why isn't that an option?

Well, because we happen to value people and we as people need farmers and developers more than we need wild horses.

It is our fault, it's also still our problem to solve. 33,000 wild horses no one wants in permanent holding pens is no answer. For the horse's sake, for the taxpayer's sake. Neither, is there anywhere that they can all just be turned loose without unintended consequences. There aren't any real good options for them. I'm as much of a softie and as against horse slaughter as anyone, but it's not unreasonable to suggest they should be killed. I would think setting up to kill them in their pens is a lot more humane than trucking them off for slaughter somewhere else!

And when it's done... never again to we pen up wild horses, IMHO. Their numbers could be theoretically be managed as necessary by periodic roundup and taking of the young for sale and adoption, like they do at Chincoteague.

[Willie boy]

I think we all should remember who is in office now when election time comes around!

[Gypsy Rose]

It's really sad that the BLM hasn't had a better management plan in the first place- it would never have come to this idea.

[Horserider]

It is our fault, it's also still our problem to solve. 33,000 wild horses no one wants in permanent holding pens is no answer. For the horse's sake, for the taxpayer's sake. Neither, is there anywhere that they can all just be turned loose without unintended consequences. There aren't any real good options for them. I'm as much of a softie and as against horse slaughter as anyone, but it's not unreasonable to suggest they should be killed. I would think setting up to kill them in their pens is a lot more humane than trucking them off for slaughter somewhere else!


Ok now look at it this way. There's an overpopulation of horses. But there's also an overpopulation of people. Why should we kick the horses's out to make room for us? We obviously can't kill people so we just move the horses out of the way. Just like we do all other animals. There isn't enough room for us all. So we move the animals out of the way.

And why is that euthanasia is the only answer we ever hear? Why isn't gelding or that one idea they had a while back to make mares infertile a good answer?

If we allow them to just get rid of the horses any way they want in my lifetime there won't be any mustangs left. And you can't say that won't happen. It can and it will if we continue at this rate.

[JackieB]

wow. this ia a really hard issue im not too sure how I feel but I think maybe they could do something more preventative. is gelding some a stupid idea.

No, gelding some wild horses is definitely not a dumb idea at all. It may not be feasible to do, but any idea that helps keep the population of wild horses and burros under control is worth at least considering.

One of the difficult aspects of such an idea though is that only a small percentage of all of the stallions sire horses. They fight for the right to sire offspring in their bands and that ensures survival of the fittest. As long as there are any stallions left, sterilizing males might not have much effect on the population.

It's definitely not feasible to "spay" mares because that's a huge and difficult surgery. But sterilizing mares would have much more effect on the population than gelding males.

This is a very tough issue. Wild horses are so majestic and an icon of the American West. But they are an introduced species and there certainly wouldn't be any political will to take land away from ranchers in order to support more wild horses. And I can't see how warehousing them is "preserving" wild horses.

I am absolutely opposed to sending them to slaughter, but I don't see how I can oppose euthanasia when I don't have a better suggestion that is feasible.

[WashingtonBay]

Horserider, as JackieB says, warehousing them in holding pens is not preserving them. I highly doubt they are breeding in the holding pens, they're probably separated into small same-gender groups.

All other options are very expensive. It's a mess, and sometimes there is no easy clean way out of a mess.

But managing and keeping healthy that many horses who cannot be handled and who have no future beyond the holding pen is not a good answer.

I agree, never again should they set up this kind of hopeless predicament. But it's too late for the ones we've got, I don't know what else can be done at this point.

Think about just how big a number 33,000 is. Food, water, vaccinations, veterinary care, foot care? All on horses who are not exactly tame.

[Horserider]

Horserider, as JackieB says, warehousing them in holding pens is not preserving them. I highly doubt they are breeding in the holding pens, they're probably separated into same gender groups.


Ok let me clarify. I don't believe warehousing them in holding pens is preserving them either. When I said that I meant the ones living wild.

[JackieB]

Ok now look at it this way. There's an overpopulation of horses. But there's also an overpopulation of people. Why should we kick the horses's out to make room for us? We obviously can't kill people so we just move the horses out of the way. Just like we do all other animals. There isn't enough room for us all. So we move the animals out of the way.

And why is that euthanasia is the only answer we ever hear? Why isn't gelding or that one idea they had a while back to make mares infertile a good answer?

If we allow them to just get rid of the horses any way they want in my lifetime there won't be any mustangs left. And you can't say that won't happen. It can and it will if we continue at this rate.

You're making good points, Horserider. There may be a solution to this problem that none of us have thought of yet. And you could be one of the people who helps us find it. You're smart and have an entire career ahead of you to decide upon. You could work on issues such as this and help us find a way to balance resource issues that so often come up between humans and wild animals.

In your solution though, you have to try to incorporate the needs of people as much as possible. It's a harsh reality, but the fact is that when humans and non-human animals come into conflict with one another over resources, the animals almost always lose. Now laws such as the Endangered Species Act help, but wild horses aren't endangered.

So try not to get too discouraged. Put your thinking cap on, study the issue, talk to your biology teacher about ideas for population control, consider becoming a lawyer to help pass laws to protect horses, and so on.

Thanks for challenging us to think about this problem in a way that preserves the population of wild horses and burros. Don't let anyone tell you that "there is no alternative". That may be true at a particular time in history, but it's up to us to come up with new solutions to problems.

[Remali]

Well, if the government can spend bazzillions on political campaigns, and expensive business getaways....
I think the government can do more than they are to help the wild horses.

[mare]

It is sad that we/they have to consider euthanasia of some 6,000 horses. With the estimate being 33,000 horses on range and the target population being 27,000. It's difficult for the BLM to get accurate counts because of the huge area to cover and the rough terrain. It can't even be easily seen from the air.

I have to point out, though, that if all grazing permits were rescinded and no cattle or sheep were allowed on public lands, the amount of grazable forage areas would be further reduced and what the number of horses (and deer, antelope and elk) those areas could support would also be reduced. This is because as part of the lease agreements, ranchers are responsible for maintaining water and forage, keeping pathways open for animals that travel (deer, antelope and elk, too) and monitoring and reducing noxious weeds. The ranchers are not just consumers, but actually help grazing areas produce better. So, maybe good range management is part of the problem, too!

[Horserider]

Thanks JackieB.

I thought of something else. Euthanasia isn't a viable option either. Think about it. Even if we just euthanized 5,000 horses that means we need the money to pay for 5,000 horses to be euthanized AND what are they going to do with them afterward? It's not a good thing to think about, but it's an important detail of this proposal.

[WashingtonBay]

Well, horserider, I think that's why they'd like to slaughter them. The meat could go to zoos and wildlife rescues and perhaps other needs. At least they'd not be wasted.

[shewasmyshadow]

I don't have time to read the whole article, but are they allowing private parties access to the horses? I mean if someone wanted to save some would they let them? Or would they try to charge them for the horses? I think there are probably more then a few people who would consider adopting them if they knew what was going to happen to them.

[mare]

There are 30,000 in feedlot-like holding pens now, and several thousand more on contract ranches that are available for adoption. Unfortunately there is no shortage of horses for anyone interested.

edited for mis-spelled word

[WashingtonBay]

I don't have time to read the whole article, but are they allowing private parties access to the horses? I mean if someone wanted to save some would they let them? Or would they try to charge them for the horses? I think there are probably more then a few people who would consider adopting them if they knew what was going to happen to them.

I think they've tried adopting as many as there is demand for. They're a little restrictive on who can take these horses, there are some rules for fencing, for starters, and only so many qualified people who want to take on horses like this.

[Blue]

I think what WB suggested, about them selling some of the young horses, would be a good idea.

I think it's wrong to kill off the wild horses. :(

[Horserider]

there are some rules for fencing,

Like the 6 foot fence you have to have. Few people who would adopt them have access to things like that.

Here are the requirements:

6. What facilities does the BLM require an adopter to have to care for a wild horse or burro?

You should provide a minimum of 400 square feet (20’ x 20’) for each animal adopted. Horses under 18 months of age may be kept in corrals with fences 5 feet high. Fences must be at least 5 feet high for ungentled burros and 6 feet high for ungentled horses over 18 months of age. You should not release an ungentled animal into a large open area, such as a pasture, since it may be very difficult to capture the animal for training or to provide veterinary care. Once the animal is gentled, you may release it into a large open area, such as a pasture.

Acceptable corrals must be heavy duty and constructed of pole, pipe, or plank construction (minimum 1 ½ inch thickness) without dangerous protrusions. Barbed wire, large-mesh woven, stranded and electric materials are unacceptable for fencing. An ideal wooden corral is shown below.

Posts should be a minimum of six inches in diameter and spaced no farther than eight feet apart. Horizontal rails should be three inch minimum diameter poles or planks at least 2" x 8". When poles are used there should be a minimum of five horizontal rails, and when 2" x 8" planks are used there should be at least four rails. No space between rails should exceed 12 inches. All rails should be fastened to the inside of the post with either heavy nails or lag screws.

You must provide shelter from inclement weather and temperature extremes for your adopted wild horse or burro. Shelters must be well-drained, adequately ventilated and be attached to the corral so animals may move freely between both areas. Shelter requirements vary for different regions of the country depending on climatic conditions. Contact your administering BLM office for shelter requirements in your area.



Edited because I messed up quotes.

[mare]

Only the most marketable get selected for adoption and the best of those are selected for the mustang challenge shows. The older, ugly (read non-mustang looking) unsound, and ill-tempered can be had with little or no restrictions. I have personally bought some. All but one worked out, but they weren't pretty.

[WashingtonBay]

Like the 6 foot fence you have to have. Few people who would adopt them have access to things like that.


Well I don't think they decided that just to be difficult. These horses are wild, and if they get away, you will not catch them. They need to be in a safe secure area until they are tamed down. For their own sake.

[Horserider]

Well I don't think they decided that just to be difficult. These horses are wild, and if they get away, you will not catch them. They need to be in a safe secure area until they are tamed down. For their own sake.

I realize that, but it does make it difficult for people to get them.

[WashingtonBay]

Only the most marketable get selected for adoption and the best of those are selected for the mustang challenge shows. The older, ugly (read non-mustang looking) unsound, and ill-tempered can be had with little or no restrictions. I have personally bought some. All but one worked out, but they weren't pretty.

Heh... my own mustang (below) was a big gangly drafty looking cuss. Not pretty, but we taught each other a lot. Losing track of him when he was sold so I could get into prettier show horses is one of my big regrets in life.

[lovesfortune]

OKay, I just read on the Pioneer Woman blog that her family takes care of mustangs. Or rather, they are the govt. mustang's but they are on their land, they feed them etc.

They have a herd of JUST MARES. This way there is no more breeding. When they first got them, there were a few mares that had been bred. They waited until the foals were born and then seperated all the colts out when they were old enough, to get the herd back to just mares.

Is this a realistic option for EVERYONE?

[WashingtonBay]

I realize that, but it does make it difficult for people to get them.

They're difficult to own. That's why there are more of them than there is demand for. None of that can just be warm-fuzzied away. They're real problems.

[Horserider]

I just had a thought. What if the BLM were to cull out the lame, sick, and wild ones. Instead of saying "We're going to euthanize 5,000 mustangs regardless of condition" they could say "We're going to euthanize the ones that are unadoptable anyway" kind of like a artificial 'natural' selection process. Then they could geld the stallions they have (that's a more viable answer than using that infertility treatment on every mare every single year).

[WashingtonBay]

OKay, I just read on the Pioneer Woman blog that her family takes care of mustangs. Or rather, they are the govt. mustang's but they are on their land, they feed them etc.

They have a herd of JUST MARES. This way there is no more breeding. When they first got them, there were a few mares that had been bred. They waited until the foals were born and then seperated all the colts out when they were old enough, to get the herd back to just mares.

Is this a realistic option for EVERYONE?

Everyone? Not everyone has room and ability to care for more horses... maybe you do... ;) But I don't.

There's a lot of domesticated horses who need homes. I think we have a contract with them first, honestly.

[WashingtonBay]

I just had a thought. What if the BLM were to cull out the lame, sick, and wild ones. Instead of saying "We're going to euthanize 5,000 mustangs regardless of condition" they could say "We're going to euthanize the ones that are unadoptable anyway" kind of like a artificial 'natural' selection process. Then they could geld the stallions they have (that's a more viable answer than using that infertility treatment on every mare every single year).

These are the lame, sick and wild adult horses who were not easily adoptable. I do believe they adopt out all that they can. These are the ones that are left.

[Horserider]

These are the lame, sick and wild adult horses who were not easily adoptable. I do believe they adopt out all that they can. These are the ones that are left.

You can't tell me that all the horses in the holding pens are unadoptable. What was it 30,000 horses? They can't all be lame, sick or wild. That's like saying all the thousands of horses that were slaughtered every year were lame, sick or had behavior problems. It's just not true. There are other reasons that the horses aren't being adopted out. Like the economy for instance. :huh: Just thinking here. I'm tired. I don't work well when I'm tired.

[WashingtonBay]

They're all wild. They just may also have other problems. The demand is for the young ones. The adult horses are not as much in demand so they sit.

They've been holding adoption clinics and sales all over the country for years. There's just only so much demand for grade adult horses that aren't tame. Is that your dream horse? Get one.

[Horserider]

Is that your dream horse? Get one.

Someday I will, but now I can't for several reasons.

1. I'm not 18 yet.
2. We can't afford one right now.
3. We don't have our own horse property to keep it.

[Rod44]

I'm with WashingtonBay on this one. I think humane slaughter is Ok too. You may as well let someone utilize the meat as just kill and bury them. Some people have pet cattle or teams of oxen, that doesn't mean that cattle can't be slaughtered and utilized.

[Remali]

If only they could do it humanely tho.....(slaughter)....and until they can, it's too inhumane as it stands now.

[WashingtonBay]

If there are that many, I think you could bring the slaughter to the horses and have it be pretty humane, and a lot more efficient. What would be inhumane and inefficient would be to transport them someplace.

It would not be pretty and I don't wish witnessing it or taking part in it on anyone. I know it would devastate me.

But I do understand why they want this option. The government shouldn't be in the business of caretaking for tens of thousands of horses for life.

[Horserider]

But I do understand why they want this option. The government shouldn't be in the business of caretaking for tens of thousands of horses for life.

And yet many people believe it should be their job to care for tens of thousands of unemployed people. Sorry couldn't resist.

Still brainstorming.

[WashingtonBay]

eh.... nvm horserider.

[Horserider]

eh.... nvm horserider.

Yeah I'm pretty sure I know what your thinking. :doh:

[WashingtonBay]

Heh... actually I doubt it. I have no response to that. :)

It does make you think though, about the thousands of things this country is doing that cost a lot of money and are nowhere in the original charter our founders set up for what government should do, and take money from us, to do.

It makes the task of trying to reduce the size of government daunting. We need to look at every single line item and ask ourselves "Why is the government doing this? Is it in our best interest for the government to do this? Can we stop doing it?"

[Stalknndashadows]

This reminds me of the slaughter debate...

The way I look at it is if you(general) don't want anything to happen to them, adopt them yourself. I know I don't want them so I won't be adopting. However, if you(general) don't want anything to happen to them yet you can't take in any of them then you(general) don't really have a dog in the fight because until you can provide for them yourself, you(general) shouldn't have much of a say really.

[lovesfortune]

Everyone? Not everyone has room and ability to care for more horses... maybe you do... ;) But I don't.

There's a lot of domesticated horses who need homes. I think we have a contract with them first, honestly.


I meant EVERYONE that is already taking care of the mustangs, but is being overpopulated. :)

NO more room for me.