GAO report summary (“BLM is concerned about the possible reaction to the destruction of healthy animals.” Go figure?) : http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-77
Here’s the full report: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0977.pdf
BLM “welcomes” report (of course it does, given what the report says): http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/newsroom/2008/november/NR_10_11_2008.html
AP article: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h0KjM5RmgCK9mR1hWIheT8pYBzFAD94CDVM81
It will be interesting to see what comments come of this report when people read it … and after the Wild National Horse and Burro Advisory Board meeting next Monday, Nov. 17, in Reno, Nev. My first reaction is this: It’s reactionary – not visionary. Even while the BLM says it has no money to care for horses in long-term holding, it’s still removing horses from the range and doesn’t appear to be considering returning them to ranges they are legally entitled to (and have been completely removed from during the past 30 years because of livestock interests, oil and gas interests, etc.) – just killing them.
How much does a contractor get to round up wild horses? Why all these catastrophic removals of hundreds of horses at a time? I’ve heard contractors get $3,000 per horse. Is that right?! Hello?! Two things wrong there (if that’s correct): No WONDER so many horses are rounded up at once (more profitable to the contractor!), and why is the BLM paying so much to REMOVE horses from the WILD when it can’t find the money to sustain them away from the wild??
Something I read recently had a huge impact on me. With 30,000 individual animals in the wild (and how do we really know that? one problem is and has been BLM’s inaccurate counting), most species at that number would be on the endangered species list. The BLM wants to drop that number even further, to 27,000. How is that the magic number?
From the summary: “Most of the field offices GAO surveyed considered similar factors in determining AML, such as rangeland conditions; however, BLM has not provided specific formal guidance to the field offices on how to set AML. Without clear guidance, BLM cannot ensure that the factors considered in future AML revisions will be consistent across HMAs. At a national level, in 2007, BLM was closer to meeting AML (about 27,200 animals) than in any other year since AMLs were first reported in 1984. The extent to which BLM has actually met AML depends on the accuracy of BLM’s population counts. Nineteen of the 26 field officials GAO surveyed used a counting method which, researchers say, consistently undercounts animals and does not provide a statistical range of population estimates.”
I don’t have the answers. If I did, I’d be on the phone, not on a blog. But a “decision” to kill horses and a government report supporting a government decision (hello!?!?) is cowardly. A number of suggestions have been put forward, and I’m pretty sure “euthanasia” isn’t anywhere on that list. Why aren’t those suggestions being considered?
From the end of the summary: “The long-term sustainability of BLM’s Wild Horse and Burro Program depends on the resolution of two significant challenges: (1) If not controlled, off-the-range holding costs will continue to overwhelm the program. The percentage of the program’s direct costs for holding animals off the range increased from $7 million in 2000 (46 percent) to $21 million in 2007 (67 percent). In 2008, these costs could account for 74 percent of the program’s budget. (2) BLM has limited options for dealing with unadoptable animals. The act provides that unadopted excess animals shall be humanely destroyed or, under certain circumstances, sold without limitation. However, BLM only manages these animals through sales with limitations. BLM is concerned about the possible reaction to the destruction of healthy animals.”
Again, totally, totally reactionary. Nothing about actually “protecting” wild horses – part of the mission – horses in the wild. And “limited options”??? Here are some: http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/solutions.htm
From the AWHPC Web site (http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com):
The AWHPC Coalition is calling for a Congressional inquiry into the government’s wild horse management policies, and coordinating a grassroots campaign in support of:
- the review of scientific findings that contradict BLM’s claims of wild horse overpopulation and negative impact on the range;
- a moratorium on round-ups until actual numbers of wild horses and burros on public lands have been independently assessed; and
- implementation of in-the-wild management, which would save millions of tax-dollars.
Go to the Web site and click on the links (shown as underlined above) to learn more.
The advisory board is accepting comments through Nov. 12 – that’s Wednesday. Please send comments to the board c/o Ramona DeLorme: ramona_delorme@blm.gov.












