The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 64
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun. 20, 2008
    Location
    Zone II, NJ
    Posts
    240

    Default Feds consider euthanizing wild horses in West

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25465974/

    I really hope this dosen't happen



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,946

    Default

    "Hoping" has never solved problems, really.

    ---"Last year about $22 million of the entire horse program's $39 million budget was spent on holding horses in agency pens. Next year the costs are projected to grow to $26 million with an overall budget that is being trimmed to $37 million, Bisson said."---

    Just as I have to cut back on the cattle I can run, some years in this drought didn't have any at all, to preserve the grasses and the native wildlife, so does the government has the obligation to be a good manager of the land and animals in their charge.

    That means accepting the hard solutions, as destocking the lands and doing something else, with those unwanted horses, euthanizing, are at times.

    The alternative to not doing anything is that the feral horses and the true native species in those ranges those horses live in will starve, the grasses be damaged and take again tens of years to recover.

    You can't battle droughts with hope. You have to be proactive.



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan. 25, 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    529

    Default

    We can argue all day about the true reasons for overpopulation and starving among the mustang herds, but what it boils down to is an INCREDIBLY short-sighted wildlife management program. They decide they're overpopulated, so they round tens of thousands of them up, not taking into account that there aren't enough adopters; at the first sign of trouble, they decide to euthanize them? How does that make any sense?

    There are some good facts about this at here; understand that it does come from a biased source, but the BLM is another biased source: http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul. 26, 2007
    Location
    Comanche, TX
    Posts
    1,242

    Default

    kerlin in gray

    We can argue all day about the true reasons for overpopulation and starving among the mustang herds, but what it boils down to is an INCREDIBLY short-sighted wildlife management program. They decide they're overpopulated, so they round tens of thousands of them up, not taking into account that there aren't enough adopters; at the first sign of trouble, they decide to euthanize them? How does that make any sense?

    Regardless of anyone's opinion of policies promulgated by wildlife biologists and range management specialists, any range's ability to support a population of feral equids is finite; thus, it makes perfect sense to remove, by whatever means, all members of a population that cannot possibly be supported by the range. The alternative is starvation for the weak after the range is irreparably damaged.

    There are some good facts about this at here; understand that it does come from a biased source, but the BLM is another biased source: http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/


    Pragmatically, the most cost effective method of controlling feral equids would be to simply shoot those numbers in excess of a range's carrying capacity. Of course, a federal policy of "shoot'em and let'em feed the coyotes" would be politically incorrect because if fails to pander to the delicate sensibilities of folks out of touch with environmental reality and might even save the taxpayers a few dollars. Lord knows, we can't have none of that!
    Tom Stovall, CJF
    No me preguntes cualquier preguntas, yo te diré no mentiras.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun. 14, 2007
    Location
    Sultan WA
    Posts
    888

    Default

    Well, I was going to have an uprising, but Tom beat me to it.

    What Tom said! in spades.

    (hell, I'll shoot the excess coyotes too - especially after one ate both my year-old kitties two months ago...)
    Homesick Angels Farm
    breeders of champion Irish Draught Sporthorses
    standing Manu Forti's Touch Down RID
    www.IrishHuntersandJumpers.com



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov. 16, 2005
    Location
    Allentown area, PA
    Posts
    130

    Angry

    what ercks me the most is that our wonderful government wants to lessen our history of the country because of funding yet they can spend billions and illions of dollars on a space program that has nothing to do with what we are dealing with in our country right now!!!! Yes it ticks me off royally. Im not even going to go into the gas thing. How about the growing child abuse cases and the homeless situation. What about the etreme raise in foreclosures and don't forget about that low lives that have to steal peoples identies for money. What about businesses going south of the boarder because it is cheaper for them, while we are barely getting by? Im sorry for the vent but Im tired of our government not putting it's people, who got them into office, first.
    Goldielox~~mommy to Opal a.k.a. Squeaky Sneakers, now knows as SIZE MATTERS, and newest baby Pizzazy a.k.a Zaz or Zazzy boy~ http://s125.photobucket.com/albums/p...er69/opal/Zaz/



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun. 9, 2003
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    5,512

    Default

    The BLM should have NEVER been given control of the feral horse herds. That's been a sore spot for eons. The problem for the mustangs is that they don't "fit" domestic livestock or wildlife, so they get no real government support. The cattle and sheep ranchers covet alot of the govt land that has pasture and want it for their livestock and don't want to share any grass with the mustangs. The wildlife folks are about the same, they only want stuff they can hunt. It's unfair and always has been. The BLM adoption programs have been fraught with problems for eons also. It's not as simple as not enough grazing available, it's who gets the prime real estate -- it's that political hand greasing and power plays and the mustangs don't have anyone doing much for them. The government has always solved animal problems with elimination. Maybe some of them would solve the problem if they were eliminated! JMHO
    PennyG



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov. 7, 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    893

    Default Wild Horses

    I've been to a "gathering", ( and yes, adopted a mustang and sent him to a sancutary that I pay a fee every month to have him there) and spoken in some depth with people that are employed to do population counts, BLM officials, etc.

    I took the time to go to Palomino Valley and do this a couple of years ago, so I could at least have somewhat of an educated opinion.
    Yes, some population control is needed, and euthanization is better than shooting - not because it is politically correct, but have you SEEN the aftermath of some of these "controlled shoots"? Yes, marksmen, yada, yada. The reality is, many misses, near misses, horses shot in the legs, stomach, back, foals shot, mothers shot with foals at their side, etc. Not all collected, many left to die from their wounds - not propoganda - fact.
    Still, euthanization is better than slaughter. Still better - birth control!!! It is being experimented with, with some success.

    And, yes, the numbers of mustangs - between 28k and 33k, is TINY compared to the number of cattle grazed, even in drought years where the ranchers get the cards to reduce their herds.

    What about the ranchers that shoot the mustangs? Or block off their access to the water that is provided by the government. Ever see a scattering of dead horses NEAR water that has been blocked off?
    Another reality. Yikes, we need to give these horses a break.
    Birth control, and more information to the public. More programs like the ones at Canon City to train for adoptions, more info about adoptions.

    They are NOT pests.



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun. 1, 2008
    Posts
    178

    Default Put up or shut up

    Wanna make a difference in the lives of the mustangs ? Adopt one.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov. 7, 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Star Creek View Post
    Wanna make a difference in the lives of the mustangs ? Adopt one.
    did it- had him since 2002- and yeah, I'll be paying his way for the next 25 years or so!

    Would that more people took your advice!



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan. 17, 2008
    Location
    Trails and woods
    Posts
    1,585

    Default

    ADOPT ONE!!!!

    B & S. I have adopted 2. These are the best horses we have. I would have another mustang before any other breed.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy76 View Post
    did it- had him since 2002- and yeah, I'll be paying his way for the next 25 years or so!

    Would that more people took your advice!
    If someone can use a fereal horse, yes, do that, they are fine horses for many uses.
    Just not for much else we may want to do with a horse.

    Horses are something that is a luxury for most people.
    Not everyone can, out of the goodness of their heart, find the money to keep a horse around they don't have any use for, any more than they could keep a, say, giraffe.

    We had a great ranch horse that happen to be from a feral horse herd in Nevada, but we had him because he was a great ranch horse, not because he was a "wild horse".



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TKR View Post
    The BLM should have NEVER been given control of the feral horse herds. That's been a sore spot for eons. The problem for the mustangs is that they don't "fit" domestic livestock or wildlife, so they get no real government support. The cattle and sheep ranchers covet alot of the govt land that has pasture and want it for their livestock and don't want to share any grass with the mustangs. The wildlife folks are about the same, they only want stuff they can hunt. It's unfair and always has been. The BLM adoption programs have been fraught with problems for eons also. It's not as simple as not enough grazing available, it's who gets the prime real estate -- it's that political hand greasing and power plays and the mustangs don't have anyone doing much for them. The government has always solved animal problems with elimination. Maybe some of them would solve the problem if they were eliminated! JMHO
    PennyG
    That is not so at all.

    Those discussions were had in the early 1970's, when the increasing numbers and the destruction they were doing to the ranges they were living in in the drought then made those feral horses starting to be a serious problem, impacting the survival of the real native species there.

    Certain ranges were determined as feral horse habitat by law and the numbers that were decided were reasonable to keep those feral horses as symbols.

    There would not be any sense to letting the horse herds keep multiplying and overrunning the ranges willy-nilly, even if there was no livestock there at all.

    Compounding those problems are that, unknown to many not living there, those federal lands are checkerboarded with private land, so the horses are affecting many land owners also.

    Just imagine if there is a herd of feral horses in NYC central park and the horses reproduce and keep running out in the streets and into people's yards and other parks.
    I doubt that many would be very happy with wild horses running thru THEIR backyards.



  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov. 7, 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    If someone can use a fereal horse, yes, do that, they are fine horses for many uses.
    Just not for much else we may want to do with a horse.

    Horses are something that is a luxury for most people.
    Not everyone can, out of the goodness of their heart, find the money to keep a horse around they don't have any use for, any more than they could keep a, say, giraffe.

    We had a great ranch horse that happen to be from a feral horse herd in Nevada, but we had him because he was a great ranch horse, not because he was a "wild horse".
    You are right.
    I am not rich. Since 2002, I make it a point to bring my lunch to work -that pays his monthly fee at the sanctuary. I didn't adopt because he is a wild horse. I did it because I didn't want him to be chased by a helicopter again at the next gathering. Small drop in the ocean, but it matters to him. Everyday. And it matters to me.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul. 26, 2007
    Location
    Comanche, TX
    Posts
    1,242

    Default

    Brandy76

    I've been to a "gathering", ( and yes, adopted a mustang and sent him to a sancutary that I pay a fee every month to have him there) and spoken in some depth with people that are employed to do population counts, BLM officials, etc.

    Your money, your call.

    I took the time to go to Palomino Valley and do this a couple of years ago, so I could at least have somewhat of an educated opinion.

    I've been there too. It's a big, nice, taxpayer-supported, BLM facility, just northeast of Sparks, NV. Last time I was there, I couldn't help but wonder at the utter waste of resources involved in housing so many unwanted equids.

    Yes, some population control is needed, and euthanization is better than shooting - not because it is politically correct, but have you SEEN the aftermath of some of these "controlled shoots"? Yes, marksmen, yada, yada. The reality is, many misses, near misses, horses shot in the legs, stomach, back, foals shot, mothers shot with foals at their side, etc. Not all collected, many left to die from their wounds - not propoganda - fact.

    Where and when did you personally witness the scene you describe? Just to make sure we're on the same page, are you saying you've seen the controlled shooting of feral equids on on BLM or Forest Service land?

    Still, euthanization is better than slaughter. Still better - birth control!!! It is being experimented with, with some success.

    "Euthanized" means "killed" and the late lamented doesn't give a damn, one way or another; furthermore, if one uses chemicals to kill instead of a bullet or captive bolt, the carcass cannot be rendered and becomes a disposal problem instead of an asset. In it's present state, attempted birth control of feral equids is both unreliable and extremely expensive - the brilliant folks over at HSUS tried it on deer and it didn't work there either.

    And, yes, the numbers of mustangs - between 28k and 33k, is TINY compared to the number of cattle grazed, even in drought years where the ranchers get the cards to reduce their herds.

    Without comment on whether or not it's "fair", the numbers of animal units permitted on BLM and FS graze is strictly controlled and does NOT take place the year around, while the numbers of feral equids on BLM and FS graze are relatively uncontrolled, they are on the range the year around, and they do exponentially greater damage to the range.

    What about the ranchers that shoot the mustangs?


    If you have personal knowledge of such activity, I urge you to contact the federal authorities as shooting any feral equid is a serious crime under the "Wild Horse...Act of 1971".

    Or block off their access to the water that is provided by the government. Ever see a scattering of dead horses NEAR water that has been blocked off?

    Have you personally witnessed such a thing? Again, if you have personal knowledge of any such activity on BLM or FS land, I urge you to report it to the federal authorities. If you don't mind me asking, how exactly does one "block off" a water hole so that cattle can get to it but horses can't?

    Another reality.

    No, unsubstantiated accusations are not "reality."

    Yikes, we need to give these horses a break.


    It's not a question of giving feral horses a "break", it's simply a question of remove them now - one way or another - or allow them to destroy their habitat. For an overview of the impact of uncontrolled grazing on semidesert grasslands, please see <http://www.tarleton.edu/~range/Grasslands/Semidesert%20Grassland/semidesertgrassland.html>.

    Birth control, and more information to the public. More programs like the ones at Canon City to train for adoptions, more info about adoptions.

    Too slow, too expensive.

    They are NOT pests.


    Feral horses are an invader species with no appreciable number of natural enemies in their habitat. If their population is allowed to increase unchecked, they will utterly destroy their habitat, damning not only themselves, but many, many, other native species to starvation.
    Tom Stovall, CJF
    No me preguntes cualquier preguntas, yo te diré no mentiras.



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov. 7, 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Stovall View Post
    Brandy76

    I've been to a "gathering", ( and yes, adopted a mustang and sent him to a sancutary that I pay a fee every month to have him there) and spoken in some depth with people that are employed to do population counts, BLM officials, etc.

    Your money, your call.

    I took the time to go to Palomino Valley and do this a couple of years ago, so I could at least have somewhat of an educated opinion.

    I've been there too. It's a big, nice, taxpayer-supported, BLM facility, just northeast of Sparks, NV. Last time I was there, I couldn't help but wonder at the utter waste of resources involved in housing so many unwanted equids.

    Yes, some population control is needed, and euthanization is better than shooting - not because it is politically correct, but have you SEEN the aftermath of some of these "controlled shoots"? Yes, marksmen, yada, yada. The reality is, many misses, near misses, horses shot in the legs, stomach, back, foals shot, mothers shot with foals at their side, etc. Not all collected, many left to die from their wounds - not propoganda - fact.

    Where and when did you personally witness the scene you describe? Just to make sure we're on the same page, are you saying you've seen the controlled shooting of feral equids on on BLM or Forest Service land?

    Still, euthanization is better than slaughter. Still better - birth control!!! It is being experimented with, with some success.

    "Euthanized" means "killed" and the late lamented doesn't give a damn, one way or another; furthermore, if one uses chemicals to kill instead of a bullet or captive bolt, the carcass cannot be rendered and becomes a disposal problem instead of an asset. In it's present state, attempted birth control of feral equids is both unreliable and extremely expensive - the brilliant folks over at HSUS tried it on deer and it didn't work there either.

    And, yes, the numbers of mustangs - between 28k and 33k, is TINY compared to the number of cattle grazed, even in drought years where the ranchers get the cards to reduce their herds.

    Without comment on whether or not it's "fair", the numbers of animal units permitted on BLM and FS graze is strictly controlled and does NOT take place the year around, while the numbers of feral equids on BLM and FS graze are relatively uncontrolled, they are on the range the year around, and they do exponentially greater damage to the range.

    What about the ranchers that shoot the mustangs?


    If you have personal knowledge of such activity, I urge you to contact the federal authorities as shooting any feral equid is a serious crime under the "Wild Horse...Act of 1971".

    Or block off their access to the water that is provided by the government. Ever see a scattering of dead horses NEAR water that has been blocked off?

    Have you personally witnessed such a thing? Again, if you have personal knowledge of any such activity on BLM or FS land, I urge you to report it to the federal authorities. If you don't mind me asking, how exactly does one "block off" a water hole so that cattle can get to it but horses can't?

    Another reality.

    No, unsubstantiated accusations are not "reality."

    Yikes, we need to give these horses a break.


    It's not a question of giving feral horses a "break", it's simply a question of remove them now - one way or another - or allow them to destroy their habitat. For an overview of the impact of uncontrolled grazing on semidesert grasslands, please see <http://www.tarleton.edu/~range/Grasslands/Semidesert%20Grassland/semidesertgrassland.html>.

    Birth control, and more information to the public. More programs like the ones at Canon City to train for adoptions, more info about adoptions.

    Too slow, too expensive.

    They are NOT pests.


    Feral horses are an invader species with no appreciable number of natural enemies in their habitat. If their population is allowed to increase unchecked, they will utterly destroy their habitat, damning not only themselves, but many, many, other native species to starvation.

    YES I HAVE witnessed these things. ME. Yes. THEY ARE NOT UNSUBSTANTITED ACCUSATIONS. I have also contacted the proper authorities. YES. ME. And have spoken to federal authorities who actually called me on several occassions to have discussions regarding this.

    Have YOU read the studies on birth control? Have YOU spoken to those using it and doing the =studies? I HAVE.

    I did not come here to fight.

    And, I am unapologetic about being anti slaughter - thus, my OPINION about slaughter versus euthanasia. And, YES, I am entitled to that educated, informed opinion.


    AND I SUPPOSE CATTLE ARE NOT AN INVASIVE SPECIES???

    In fact I mentioned population control IS NEEDED.
    I am not referencing the HSUS.

    Lighten up.



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy76 View Post
    YES I HAVE witnessed these things. ME. Yes. THEY ARE NOT UNSUBSTANTITED ACCUSATIONS. I have also contacted the proper authorities. YES. ME. And have spoken to federal authorities who actually called me on several occassions to have discussions regarding this.

    Have YOU read the studies on birth control? Have YOU spoken to those using it and doing the =studies? I HAVE.

    I did not come here to fight.

    And, I am unapologetic about being anti slaughter - thus, my OPINION about slaughter versus euthanasia. And, YES, I am entitled to that educated, informed opinion.


    AND I SUPPOSE CATTLE ARE NOT AN INVASIVE SPECIES???

    In fact I mentioned population control IS NEEDED.
    I am not referencing the HSUS.

    Lighten up.
    Don't be silly. Cattle numbers are managed.
    That means only so many are where they are supposed to be.
    No one that owns cattle want them to starve, so they are removed when the range is not supporting them, unlike wildlife and feral horses, that go where they want to, when they want to and starve after they run out of something to eat or water, by no fault of anyone.
    In fact many times ranchers, the oh so maligned ogres, feed and water the feral horses, out of their own meager resources.

    The way you are speaking, you really must not have been around much, or only with certain groups that have been battling the BLM at every turn, with lawsuits even, causing their hands to be tied to do ANYTHING and putting out then the word that the BLM is failing by not doing anything.
    Duh!



  18. #18
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2002
    Posts
    1,759

    Default

    There is only room for so many horses. Something has to be done. I would much rather see BLM euthanize the horses than send them to slaughter. Or give them away to people who don't know what they are getting into and the horse ends up on long road of suffering, to still end up in slaughter. And I don't mean use them as target practice on the range. Either chemically euthanize them or shoot them in the head at close range. They can't all stay out on the rangeland. They will overgraze it, damage the resource, and many will starve to death to top it off. That would happen whether all the ranchers cattle and sheep were kicked off public land or not. At some point, the horses population would become too much for the land to support.

    There are too many horses period. A lot of people on here cheer FuglyHorse and her bid to stop the idea that every mare must have a foal. Then turn around and say leave the wild horses to do just that. There are way more horses than adopters. Somehow the population has to be reduced. I am all for reducing herds to manageable numbers, then giving "the pill" to most of the mares. Continue to adopt out of long term care. We could only hope that at some point they would be down to so few horses that there would actually be more demand than supply.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,946

    Default

    Look at Australia.
    For what I have heard, their feral horse problem is so great that, every so often, as their numbers get out of hand by any measure, they have to mass shoot them from helicopters to keep them from starving.

    I don't think we want to go there with our feral horses.

    Odd, that people agree to kill extra horses but think that slaughter is evil.
    Veeery odd.



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov. 7, 2007
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    893

    Default Again, didn't post for a fight

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Don't be silly. Cattle numbers are managed.
    That means only so many are where they are supposed to be.
    No one that owns cattle want them to starve, so they are removed when the range is not supporting them, unlike wildlife and feral horses, that go where they want to, when they want to and starve after they run out of something to eat or water, by no fault of anyone.
    In fact many times ranchers, the oh so maligned ogres, feed and water the feral horses, out of their own meager resources.

    The way you are speaking, you really must not have been around much, or only with certain groups that have been battling the BLM at every turn, with lawsuits even, causing their hands to be tied to do ANYTHING and putting out then the word that the BLM is failing by not doing anything.
    Duh!

    Say what you will, it matters not, silly you!



Similar Threads

  1. like a wild west rescue!
    By Drive NJ in forum Driving
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Jun. 21, 2012, 04:53 PM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: Apr. 3, 2010, 08:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •