Myth: There are too many wild horses and
burros on public lands and their numbers must be reduced.
Fact: The
opposite is true – there are too few wild horses and burros
on our
public lands, and unless their numbers grow, the survival of these
special animals is in jeopardy. During the 1800’s, it is estimated that
there were more than two million wild horses and burros roaming the West.
These animals, along with countless wildlife species ranging from bison to
wolves to prairie dogs, were the victims of ghastly extermination efforts,
primarily to make way for private domestic livestock grazing. Today,
there are less than 40,000 wild horses and burros remaining on millions of
acres of our Western public lands. Tragically, the interests of these
“living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West” are being
forfeited for those of the livestock industry and other commercial
operations.
Many wild horse and burro herds are being
managed at such dangerously low numbers that their long-term health and
genetic viability are seriously imperiled. In 1999, the federal
government sponsored a wild horse and burro population viability forum in
which several leading scientific experts including Drs. Gus Cothran,
Francis Singer and John Gross, participated. One of the main issues
discussed was that smaller, isolated populations of less than 200 animals
are particularly vulnerable to the loss of genetic diversity when the
number of animals participating in breeding falls below a minimum needed
level. This scenario sets the stage for a host of biological problems
associated with inbreeding including reduced reproduction and foal
survival, reduced adult fitness and physical deformities. Only about one
quarter of the herds under active management have a population objective
of greater than 150 animals, much less 200. Numerous herds are being
managed at levels between 40 to 70 animals and some even fewer. Either
geographical or artificial barriers isolate many of these herds. Rather
than address this grave problem by increasing population targets for these
animals, the agencies charged with their protection, the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (FS), have decided
to further reduce wild horse and burro numbers by half to a shocking
22,000 wild horses and 2,700 wild burros.
Myth: Wild horses and burros must
be rounded up to save them from dying of starvation or thirst.
Fact:
While the BLM argues that wild horses and burros are being
rounded up for their own good to keep them from dying of starvation or
dehydration in areas affected by fire and drought throughout the West,
animal advocates have frequently found that herd areas stricken by
so-called “emergency conditions” weren’t nearly as bad off as the BLM
claimed. Not only were wild horses and burros doing just fine, but
livestock often remained in the same areas or were returned to the areas
in short order. Of course, once the wild horses and burros are gone, they
are gone for good – moving in the direction of achieving the overall
objective of drastically reducing populations as quickly as possible. By
attempting to justify extra removals as “emergencies,” the BLM is able to
tap into emergency funds from other programs and go over and above their
allocated budgets to meet this goal.
Tragically, many wild horse and burro herds
suffer needlessly due to the fact that they have been unable to roam
freely throughout their entire herd areas because of fences and other
impediments that have been constructed to accommodate livestock. Hence,
they are unable to access forage and water to which they are legally
entitled. Wild horses and burros have survived droughts and fires in the
past and will survive them in the future, just as do other wild animals,
if they are treated as wild animals and left alone.
Myth: Wild horses and burros are
destructive to the environment and must be removed in order to protect
ecosystem health.
Fact: Wild
horses and burros, like any wildlife species, have an impact on the
environment, but due to their natural behavior, their impact is minimal.
In fact, wild horses and burros play a beneficial ecological role, for
example, by dispersing seeds through elimination, thereby helping to
reseed the landscape. They also blaze trails during heavy snowfall and
break ice at watering holes, helping weaker animals to survive during
harsh winter months. Wild horses and burros can also serve as food for
predator species such as mountain lions.
That said, if BLM and FS officials would
have the public believe that they are genuinely concerned about ecosystem
health, then they must refrain from conducting business as usual -- viz.,
turning a blind eye to the indisputably overriding cause of habitat
degradation: livestock grazing and public encroachment. For years, the
agencies have permitted extremely high levels of livestock use on public
lands, resulting in soil erosion, water contamination and depletion, as
well as deterioration of vegetation. While wild horses and burros may be
blamed for these problems, the agencies’ own data indicate otherwise.
Little has changed since the release of the 1990 U.S. General Accounting
Office Report,
Improvements
Needed in Federal Wild Horse Program, which concluded “… the
primary cause of the degradation in rangeland resources is poorly managed
domestic (primarily cattle and sheep) livestock.” Unlike cattle who tend
to congregate and settle in riparian areas, wild horses and burros are
highly mobile, typically visiting watering areas for only short periods of
time. To make matters worse, livestock are concentrated in grazing
allotments at artificially high densities during the critical growing
season when vegetation is extremely vulnerable to permanent damage. This
overgrazing sets the stage for habitat degradation that may not be
immediately apparent, but can cumulatively cause massive vegetation
die-off.
Myth: Wild horses and burros are
an exotic or a feral species and must be removed to protect native
wildlife.
Fact: Not
so. The paleontological record shows that the cradle of equine evolution
occurred in North America, beginning more than 60 million years ago.
Conventional theories postulate that horses introduced by the Spanish more
than 500 years ago were a different species than those horses who existed
in North America prior to their mysterious disappearance approximately
10,000 years ago. However, mitochondrial DNA analysis of fossil remains
indicates that E. caballus, the “modern” horse, is
genetically identical to E. lambei, the most recent equine
species to evolve in North America more than 1.7 million years ago.
Hence, it can plausibly be argued that the Spanish actually “reintroduced”
a native species, one which evolved on this continent and which has
adapted and flourished both biologically and ecologically since its
reintroduction. Interestingly, some scientists question the theory that
all horses became extinct 10,000 years ago. They are only now beginning
to analyze fossil remains that may eventually support this hypothesis.
Moreover, simply because horses were
domesticated before being released is biologically inconsequential.
Observing horses in the wild demonstrates just how quickly domesticated
behavioral and morphological traits fall off. According to Dr. Patricia
Fazio, “The key element in describing an animal as a native species is (1)
where it originated; and (2) whether or not it co-evolved with its
habitat.” By virtue of their evolutionary history, biology and behavior,
these animals are native wildlife. In addition, the 1971 WFHBA rightfully
recognized them as an “integral part of the natural system of the public
lands.”
MYTH: Ranchers depend upon livestock
grazing for their livelihood and wild horses and burros are creating an
undue hardship on their operations.
Fact: While some small family ranchers do depend upon
livestock for their primary source of income, the top grazing permits on
our public lands in terms of numbers of livestock are held by corporate
interests including the Hilton Family Trust, Anheuser-Busch, Inc., Nevada
First Corp., and Metropolitan Life Co. In 1992, the General Accounting
Office reported that just 16 percent of the approximately 20,000 public
lands grazing permittees controlled more than 76.2 percent of forage
available on BLM lands and most of these were either very wealthy
individuals or big corporations. These wealthy corporate interests are
much more concerned with paper stock than livestock, and with preserving
their tax write-offs than a way of life. For the most part, removing wild
horses and burros translates into just one more form of corporate
welfare.
Studies indicate that most ranchers are
choosing to diversify their sources of income. Today, less than 3% of our
nation’s beef is produced on public rangelands. Ranching on both public
and private lands accounts for less than 0.5% of all income by Western
residents. In 1994, the Department of the Interior concluded that the
elimination of all public lands grazing would result in the loss of only
0.1% of the West’s total employment. Changing times and demographics, not
a small number of wild horses and burros, are responsible for the decline
of the ranching industry’s importance in the West. The time has come to
help wild horses and burros and to assist ranchers who want to voluntarily
transition from a profession that is taking its toll on their pocketbooks.
MYTH: WITHOUT FEDERAL GRAZING PROGRAM
ASSISTANCE, RANCHERS WOULD BE UNABLE TO CARRY ON A CHERISHED FAMILY
TRADITION AND WAY OF LIFE.
Fact:
Small family ranchers, just as small family farmers, have far more
to fear from corporate interests than they do from responsible federal
lands management policy. In fact, about 70% of cattle producers in the
West own all the land they operate and do not rely on public lands grazing
whatsoever. It can reasonably be argued that those ranchers who benefit
from ridiculously cheap public lands grazing fees and other government
subsidies associated with federal grazing permits have a distinct
advantage over those who do not. Many of these ranchers who now fancy
themselves as modern day “cattle barons” are millionaires and billionaires
who made their fortunes in other businesses – e.g., Texas oilman, Oscar
Wyatt, Jr. former chairman of Coastal Corp., McDonald’s French fries
supplier John Simplot, and Mary Hewlett Jaffe, daughter of William Hewlett
of Hewlett-Packard fame. The top 10 percent of public lands grazing permit
holders control a striking 65 percent of all livestock on BLM lands and 49
percent on FS lands. The bottom 50 percent of public lands grazing permit
holders control just 7 percent of livestock on BLM lands and 3 percent on
FS lands.
Because public lands grazing allotments
require ownership of private base property and wealthy individuals and
corporations own more private property (i.e., base property), they wind up
with more federal grazing allotments. Hence, these wealthy operations
benefit from numerous taxpayer subsidies, while small family operations
struggle to make ends meet. These “cattle barons” and corporations are
increasingly buying out small ranching operations -- acres at a time.
With rising operating costs and mounting debts, most small family ranchers
are looking for work outside the ranch and a way out of ranching.
Some ranchers have expressed an interest in
a proposal that would provide for their needs as they transition into
other lines of work. If a rancher voluntarily relinquishes his/her
federal grazing permit, the government would compensate the permitee $175
per animal unit month (the amount of forage necessary to graze one cow and
calf for one month). Not only would such an arrangement help ranchers and
be a huge cost savings to taxpayers (see last myth), but it would also
allow forage to be reallocated to wildlife including wild horses and
burros.
MYTH: Removed horses and burros
are adopted to loving homes through the government’s “Adopt a Horse or
Burro Program.”
Fact:
While the BLM has an obligation to ensure that the persons adopting
wild horses and burros are “qualified” adopters, many people do not fully
understand the responsibility and commitment that are required to care for
an adopted animal, thus setting the stage for failed adoptions. Rigorous
screening of potential adopters, education and monitoring are critical to
the success of any adoption. Sadly, the BLM has failed in all of these
areas. In 1997, the Associated Press uncovered enormous and
egregious abuse within the adoption program, including the revelation that
many individuals were adopting large numbers of wild horses only to turn
around and make sizable profits by selling them for slaughter. To make
matters worse, The New York Times reported on a Justice Department
investigation that revealed that BLM had a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy
on this issue, and that in fact many employees were well aware that
adopters intended to sell horses for slaughter after receiving title.
Only after being sued by wild horse advocates did the BLM agree to adopt
measures to stem the tide of horses going to slaughter, but even then,
countless horses fell through the cracks.
Of immediate concern is an amendment to the
WFHBA that was slipped into the Interior Appropriations bill in the last
Congressional session, requiring horses 10 years-of-age or older or those
who have not been adopted after three attempts to be sold at auction
without limitation. Such “sale authority” will open the floodgates of
wild horses being sold to slaughter for profit. More than 8,000 wild
horses may immediately wind up on the dinner plates in fancy overseas
restaurants, and countless more will follow unless legislation is swiftly
enacted to repeal this ill-conceived amendment.
H.R. 249,
introduced by Congressman Nick Rahall (D-WV) and Congressman Ed Whitfield
(R-KY) in the House of Representatives to restore the slaughter
prohibition for wild horses and burros.
H.R. 503,
the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act, reintroduced by Congresswoman
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Congressman Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Congressman John
Spratt (D-SC) and Congressman Nick Rahall (D-WV) and in the Senate by
Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and veterinarians and Senator John Ensign
(R-NV) as
S. 311 will ensure that no horse
meets this appalling fate.
The 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros
Act and its legislative history make it clear that Congress, with
overwhelming public support, intended for wild horses and burros to be
protected in the wild, and removed only when necessary, and if removed,
guaranteed humane treatment. They were never to be sold for slaughter.
Myth: With thousands of wild
horses and burros awaiting adoption, the program is too costly and the
only solution is to either sell or destroy “excess” animals who haven’t
been adopted or are deemed “unadoptable.”
Fact: In 2001, the BLM adopted a reckless
strategy to reduce the numbers of wild horses and burros on public lands
by more than half by the year 2005, without any environmental review
whatsoever. Up to that point in time, adoptions had kept pace with
removals. Increased removals resulted in a backlog of animals awaiting
adoption. Many animals were automatically shipped to long-term holding
facilities and never even put up for adoption. With more than 20,000
animals languishing in holding facilities, costs for the inflated number
of removals and the animals’ care have mounted – all directly attributable
to BLM’s own misguided strategy. BLM’s FY 2005 budget for administering
the program was $39 million.
However, if the BLM were genuinely
interested in fiscal responsibility, the agency would provide the public
with a detailed analysis of the full costs of administering its livestock
grazing program. A recent analysis of the budget records concluded that
the net direct loss (calculated as the Congressional
Appropriations for the program less fee receipts to the Treasury) of the
livestock program was at least $72 million for the BLM and $52 million for
the FS; the full costs are likely to be three to four times these
amounts. However, with the multiple taxpayer subsidies ranchers receive
ranging from below-market-value grazing fees to fire and weed control to
predator and “pest” control to range improvements, to price supports, to
the regular removal of wild horses and burros, etc., it is certain that
the agency loses hundreds of millions of dollars each year. Removing
livestock instead of wild horses and burros would indeed be the most
fiscally responsible action the agency could take.
