Peace in Solitude

Saige and I went out into the shrub-steppe yesterday.  I'm always amazed at the silence out there.  Once I turn off the rumble of the truck and step out into the crisp air, my ears are delightfully met with the sounds of ... nature.  It must have looked like I was praying in church as I stood out there with my eyes closed.  I let the sun shine down on me as I absorbed the sounds of the wind rushing over the grassy hillsides, listened to the bird's sing (a seemingly common bird I cannot identify),  and breathed in the smell of sage, of horses, of spring.  It is no wonder that I did not want to turn around as the sun began to slip lower in the sky.

This land makes my heart go pitter-patter!

Public land policy and wild horses

I’m going to delve a little into policy here...

Due to the public outcry concerning the treatment of free-roaming horses, Congress declared that they were fast disappearing from the western landscape.  As a result, they enacted the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act (hereafter referred to as Wild Horse Act).  It placed their care under the Secretary of the Department of Interior to be managed on public lands by the Bureau of Land Management, which at the time knew nothing about how many horses there were or how to manage them.   They would learn on the fly though as the Act states that the horses shall be managed as an “integral part of the natural system of the public lands.”  The Secretary is also to manage these animals in “a manner designed to achieve and maintain a thriving ecological balance on public lands,” to consult with state wildlife agency, and to take into consideration wildlife needs, particularly those that are endangered.  This means that excess animals (horses and burros) are to be removed to maintain said “ecological balance,” pursuant to the Wild Horse Act.  Again, the Secretary shall capture excess horses.  It is mandatory. It is declared by Congress.

…If Congress only knew what a mess the consequences of this policy would be over the next forty years.  Ranchers have filed for “takes” when horses wander onto private property and cause damages.  Activists have continually cried out for the “rights” of horses and hailed the BLM capture methods “inhumane.”

Also mixed in with the Wild Horse Act and management of horses on public lands is the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA).  Among other purposes (readers can read others on their own if interested), Congress declared that management of this policy is to be “on the basis of multiple use and sustained yield” §102(7); to promptly create “regulations and plans for the protection of public land areas of critical environmental concern” FLPMA §102(11); and to be managed in a way that recognizes the Nation’s needs for “sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands” FLPMA §102(12).  Now, horse management must be managed in accordance with the other uses intended for public lands to serve our Nation.  Among these uses is livestock grazing with its own section in the FLPMA (Range Management §401).  And as declared with the Taylor Grazing Act long before it in 1936, the FLPMA gives power to the Secretary to issue livestock grazing permits and leases on ten year cycles.  This was occurring long before the wild horses became protected under the Wild Horse Act.  Therefore, to maintain an “ecological balance,” horse management is constrained by multiple-use, wildlife, and other uses of public lands.  Contrary to many beliefs, the horses are not entitled to any land.  No, they must share it and indeed the BLM must - or rather shall - manage them to coexist with the other uses.

Wild Horses: Best Birthday Ever

I woke up this morning dreading my birthday. It was just to be another start to the weekend spent in my apartment studying and listening to Saige whine because I had to put my nose in a book or stare glossy-eyed at the computer screen. However, after I administered a healthy dose of my morning stimulant (coffee, of course), I got to moving. I planned to run errands (groceries and see Jiggs), come home, put Saige down for a nap, and be productive. This lovely schedule was not to be. I got as far as one block, with the beautiful sun shining down on the hills surrounding Kittitas Valley, before I turned around and ran back for my camera.

In a spontaneous decision that I am so glad I made, Saige and I decided to go see free-roaming horses!

In Yakima, I picked up a friend and hit HWY 97, eager and my heart doing excited flutters in my anticipation. It was not too far south of Toppenish when we saw our first glimpse of some ponies on the hillsides. Folks have not been kidding around that they are…right there! I remember driving this same route to Goldendale all the time six years ago and I never saw these horses. Today, they are not to be missed. They grazed the hills in plain view of the two-lane highway below, where semi’s and cars whiz by.

We took several of the dirt roads down to the right. First thing I noticed was that there was no mistaking what was the dominant wildlife in the area: horses. Their tracks and defecation were everywhere. I could not believe the amount of stud piles seen within view of the road, or on the road! The grazing was limited and shrubs aplenty. Speaking from what knowledge I know, overgrazing causes an increase in woody vegetation, and there was certainly not a lack of sagebrush. We did not see any horses on our first dirt road jaunt, but did see a strewn skeleton that was very well bleached and picked clean.  It was not really a bad thing.  It is the natural ebb and flow of life.

Saige following her Auntie Megan

We had more luck on the next road I turned down. Since the first road followed water, and horses tend to drink at dawn or dusk, I made sure this road went up. Sure enough, we caught our first close look at a buckskin stallion and his bay mare. I took several pictures of the two of them before they skirted down the hillside. These horses are very skiddish. If I am to catch any decent photographs of them, or the Kigers this summer, I will need a better lens.

Bay mare and her hunky buckskin

BLM budget cut: opinion

Some people might be celebrating at the news of budget cuts to the Bureau of Land Management’s Wild Horse program.  Though the cut is just a drop in the bucket -- two million compared to billions that are cut from other programs -- Dan Burton says that he hopes it will force the BLM to “treat the mustangs in a humane way.” 

Critics say that program costs have been increasing.  Instead of using this rise in costs to fix the management problem, the BLM continues to round up horses off the range and add to the cost of long term holding.  According to this article, 40,000 are held in holding off the range, while only 30,000 are left in their “natural habitat.”  Since the horses have been protected since 1971, these increasing numbers of captured horses versus free-roaming horses are a reason for many concerns.

What is the BLM to do if this cut is approved?

Increase allocation to horses while decreasing livestock grazing permits?  Allow the horses to populate on the delicate semi-arid and arid ecosystems?  Reinstate the provision allowing the Secretary to destroy: (1) old, sick, or lame animals; (2) excess horses and burros for which an adoption demand does not exist in order to cut funding of long term holding? 

Two million dollars does not seem like much, but I have heard through the grapevine various people express their concerns that it may have an impact on horse gathers and horse management overall.  I refer back to something I read recently in Federal Public Lands and Resources Law by Coggins, Wilkinson, & Leshy.  Upholding the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act has not been a pretty story and has often been condemned as the product of “mindless emotionalism.”  Horse management appears to be continuing on this difficult tract led by public outcry and concern for this feral species. If it was any other animal than a horse, management would be eradicating them, not continuing to protect them. 

This rather cynical opinion (or at least it feels that way to me) may be due to my sleep deprived state (who told me grad school was a great idea?), but it still irks me that outcry, driven purely by emotions and not fact, or seemingly any ounce of reason, has such a strong power over our government.  If funding is to be cut, it should be based purely on well-thought economic decisions of necessity or science proving that horse populations are at appropriate numbers and gathers not needed for many herds.

Horse deaths at Indian Lakes road holding facility

I read an RT Fitch post this morning written by Maureen Harmonay, Equine Advocacy Examiner. It was stated that horses were dying at the Indian Lakes Road holding Facility near Fallon, Nevada as a result of secondary pneumonia. Mostly in the younger horses. This has been a common problem at this facility for the past year, according to what Harmonay found.

Another problem has been hyperlipemia, which Harmonay states is caused by the BLMs gather operations.

In a repeat of the pattern that emerged at the same facility after last year’s Calico Complex roundup, other horses are starting to die or be “euthanized” as a result of what the BLM’s veterinarian characterizes as “hyperlipemia,” a condition of metabolic and liver failure caused by the extreme stress of the helicopter chase, entrapment, and ongoing captivity.   Four of the horses who died at Indian Lakes Road in recent weeks were deemed to have perished from this roundup-related condition.

Now, I am not going to argue that this disease might have been brought on by the stress of gathers.  But, following the link that was provided it states "Poor feed quality or decrease in feed intake....Onset of disease is associated with stress, decreased feed intake, fat mobilization and deposition in the liver, and overproduction of triglycerides, which may be precipitated by insulin resistance."  I find, following the link that they even provided, Harmonay has left out something that might have been a major contributor to why these horses fell ill.  Decreased feed intake.

Why is it these activists never step back and look for underlying causes?  It was probably brought on by the gather operations, yes, but why?  The Calico horses were rated as a 2 or 3 on the Henneke score.  Gather operations for the Antelope Complex have rated most of the horses so far as 3, some 4s and some 5s.  But most of what I see here are rated fairly low.  So, underlying cause for the reason these horses are getting sick?  Decreased feed intake as forage became scarce this winter?  Maybe? 

Searching some more, I have found the Indian Lakes Report from February 13, 2010, which even stated that death of horses last year was caused by "re-feeding" syndrome. Based on the report, they started a plan that got the horses re-fed in a way that would prevent hyperlipemia by introducing grass hay first and then in a few weeks slowly adding something that would put weight on them: alfalfa.

Might this be the same thing that is happening now along with the pneumonia cases?  This is the report for this year.  There have been quite a few deaths due to respiratory infections and hyperlipemia.

Again, why do activists automatically start blaming gather operations for deaths?  What about the underlying causes that bring on these diseases?  Aren't these causes the reason the BLM rounds up the horses in the first place?  Poor body condition?  Little forage?  If activists want to do some good for these horses, they should take a step back and analyze the whole picture, and then rather than being critical, provide assistance to help these horses.

Erroneous report to defund BLM round-ups?

I will do anything to not do homework, apparently.

 Report to Congress....Request to Defund Roundups

I just scanned through this report to congress to defund the BLM round ups. I did not do an in-depth view of it, but did notice their numbers seemed a little off. How did they come up with a number that is over 10,000 fewer than what the BLM says? If they are relying on counts by Craig Downer, based on his methods, which I couldn't replicate with the amount of information he provided, he could easily have missed horses. 

Other studies to count horses have been done before. The author of Dances with Wolves, Michael Blake, was so sure the BLM was wrong. He and the Public Lands Resource Council, who had little experience with aerial counting of large mammals, decided to do their own count. But they had no idea what they were doing and grossly undercounted the horse population. In his methods, which are supposed to be detailed enough that someone else can replicate the same study, Downer did not mention what airplane he used, but he referred to it as a "two-seater."  Is this a helicopter or fixed wing aircraft?   Fixed wing aircraft lead to inaccurate counts.  He does refer to it as a plane....Downer also did not mention anything about his counting method other than the camera, video recording, and transects.  Double-counting is how the BLM makes sure they can get as accurate a number as they can.

Besides their wacky numbers, which seem as erroneous to me as they state the BLM's numbers are, their sources are not credible. Therefore, when I saw their reference list, I wanted to toss the whole report. They relied on blog posts, internet websites, BLM data off their websites, a few personal communication with the Cloud Foundation (a highly reputable source!) and a conservation zoo place. Oh, and one - I repeat ONE - peer reviewed journal article on genetics. These were the sorts of references they used to support their argument. I saw no interviews with BLM personal. Seems like talking to some of these people who run the program would be a good start to hear from their mouths what the numbers are. Rather, they slunk around on websites to pull their data.

Well, I won't get too much more critical, especially since I haven't been able to do an in-depth look at it. But based on a glance...

Has anyone else seen this and have any thoughts? Do I have it all wrong?

Hoping on adoption

My dad called me this morning asking if I knew anyone with a stock trailer. He is hoping to pick up a second job and start saving to adopt a Kiger mustang this fall. His adopted his last Kiger, a magnificent 8 year old stud, at Lynden, Washington when the Adopt-a-horse program was making its rounds. This was in May of 2005. My dad loved that horse. I remember that he would sit for hours down in the shelter while Kody ate. Since my dad had never handled a wild horse before, gentling was a slow process. I think there were times when he got very frustrated because of it.

My parents hired a trainer to come out, but his methods were old and cruel. They consisted of roping Kody and trying to overcome him with force. Needless to say, that did not work, and I believe it set my dad back a few weeks. They finally hired another trainer, someone well-known, but I can't remember his name. All I remember was that my mom wished I'd been there, because he was cute! He did much better with Kody, and helped my dad get on track. By 2008 (and maybe earlier, since I wasn't living at home it's hard to keep track of Kody's timeline) my dad was able to pet him, brush him, somewhat lead him, and pick up his feet. This older wild horse, which had even kicked me at one time, was just the most lovable thing. He loved attention and had the kindest eye.

Unfortunately, my parents fell on hard times. Being a truck driver, it's hard for my dad to always have consistent work. Therefore, in 2009 dad gave Kody away to a Kiger breeder. I think she bred him a couple times, and according to dad, sold him to someone in Eastern Washington. I'm sure has made a great horse for whoever has him!

Now, dad is hoping to pick up another Kiger this fall to give it another try. He regrets giving Kody away. At least now he will know what to expect in gentling a wild horse. He is looking forward to the unbreakable bond that can be made. I am excited for him. I hope he can go through with it. I cannot adopt one myself at this time, but it would be great for me to be able to learn through my dad more about the process.

Mare at Antelope Roundup

“The care, well-being, and humane treatment of America’s wild horses, both on and off the range, are the highest priority for the BLM. The BLM is aware of the video taken on Jan. 27, 2011, during the Antelope Complex gather of the mare that slipped and fell in the snow. The BLM is conducting an internal review of the incident, and will make the information available to the public once that review has been completed.” ~BLM Nevada

I am interested to see the review.  As I have watched the video twice, I did not notice that the pilot did anything wrong.  He was far back the entire time.  The horses were loping or trotting.  It was when they released the Judas horse that the band lumped together, made a sharp turn, and then the mare slipped on the snow.  The pilot did not torture her or buzz her or hound her to get up and get a move on.  She is breathing normal and appears to be calm. Then she finds her footing, gets up, and lopes down the hill.  It is at this time that the pilot attempted twice to turn her into the trap site where she loped some and trotted some, but she refused to be herded in.  He let her go.  I do not know what happened after that or if she was let free for the day to be rounded up later, but either way, the helicopter pilot released the pressure when he saw she was not going to go in where he wanted her.  That is my take on the occurrence.  Here is the video for you to make your own determination.  These of course are just my opinions.

 

AR's take any footage they can of horses falling and blow it out of proportion to look like animal cruelty.  In another clip a horse slipped and you can hear in the background people gasping at the audacity of it.  Their antics are unforgiving, thoughtless, and single-minded.  They are as cruel as they believe the BLM to be.  They jump at any attempt to make the them look bad when rounding up the horses.  

What gets me, is if the BLM did not round them up, they would later be charging the BLM again with footage of starving horses and dusty ranges.  Either that, or they would blame the cows like they do day in and day out.  What they refuse to realize is that cows are managed and controlled.  Even if every last cow was removed from the range and the horses were allowed all of it, within a decade there would be mass starvation die-offs and the range would be bare.  

I am using the Yakama Reservation as an example.  They have not had much cattle grazing on their ranges in many years.  The horses population has exploded to 12,000 and there are accounts of areas where it has been so overgrazed that forage is not growing back. That can be expected to happen if Animal Rights' activists get their way with wild horse management.

At least the BLM and those who really do advocate for the wild horses, and wildlife, get that and understand that.  Hopefully we can be the voice of reason that wins over this voice of hysteria.

Give Me A Horse!

Give me a horse!

One that has thunder in his hooves,

One that has lightening in his legs,

One with fire in his eyes --

Give me a horse!

So that I may ride until the ends of time

Upon a steed with the power of the world.

Cultural Resource Wars, in brief

I do not have to see free-roaming horses galloping unbridled on the ranges to know they are important to many American people. Whether these people are loyal volunteers and adopters, photographers, viewers, activists fighting for what they feel is right for the care of horses, or any combination thereof, mustangs have a place in our hearts and souls. Horses are no longer viewed as simply a tool to get work done on farms and ranches, or a vehicle to get from point A to point B. They are a cultural resource, as important to some people as historic properties are to archaeologists, or cultural properties are to native peoples. Americans have formed a kinship with the horses that have roamed the ranges of the Great Basin since the 16th century. They are a very valuable cultural resource.

The ongoing dispute that has been roaring since Velma Bronn Johnston is how I know that horses are important to America.  If they were not, the fight to preserve them would not be so intense.  Cultural resources are important for the identity of people and they are always surrounded by extreme emotions. The horses are no different. Americans identify with them.  They are an iconic figure of what the west once was, freedom, our history.  Their existence value outweighs the value of many other rangeland values.  This is where the conflict has clashed.

Arguably, there are two, or more, cultural resource wars occurring.  The free-roaming horses and cattle are the two most disputed.  Yes, cattle are a cultural resource as well.  They define many western people of the Great Basin.  The cow.  The range.  Wide open spaces.  And then the horses.  Freedom.  The old west.  A living legend.   It is a war to decide whose resource has more value on rangelands.

The cattle ranchers depend on their cattle for their livelihood, therefore the rangelands are very important for their use.  The horse activists depend on their horses because they are central to their identity, therefore the horse's existence on the ranges is very important.  Between these two resources, angry words and clashing values collide.

I will not try to decide whose resource is more beneficial or valuable to the common American.  I am simply writing this for my own benefit in order to help myself understand both sides of the issue at the heart.  On either side is justification and the threat of identity loss.  Understanding this further will help me interact with both sides of this great debate.  We can all hope that in the future a solution will be discovered that benefits both the cattle ranchers the horse people of America.

Horses as a Native Species, Now

This morning, I have been mulling over the social pressure to designate free-roaming horses as a native species.  Many people appear to want the horses classified this way.  Their arguments are that wild horses were here over 10,000 years ago.  They evolved in North America.  Their life began here, and now they have come home.  I worry, however, about what might happen if horses, an animal domesticated for thousands of years, is given native status.

Since horses have been in the care of humans, they have essentially become livestock.  Husbandry changed them.  And then when they were brought back to North America by explorers, dispersed throughout the West by ranchers, miners, farmers, and Indians, they became wild once again.  But, something had changed to the ecosystem they once called home.  It was dry.  Forage was not as lush as it had been when they left.  Those that once preyed upon their flesh were all gone.  Life was good, if you were a horse.  Few deaths, high birth rates, and their population was ever increasing at a geometric rate. 

Their numbers were held in check, however. Although their numbers were once estimated in the millions and once  may have competed with the bison, they have always had a predator.  At the time when their numbers peaked, there were a few factors that allowed it.  The west was still wide open.  The cities and settlements of today had not taken root.  Also, horses were in demand.  These wild creatures running the ranges were used by the Indians, the ranchers, and the farmers. 

And then, when they became numerous and competed with livestock, horrible things were done to trim the herds.  They were run off cliffs.  They were shot.  They were corralled and left to die slowly.  Until recent history, their population was always controlled in some way.  Even now, frequent gathers prevent them from overpopulating.

Horses are an introduced species to this modern day North American ecosystem.  If the landscape was more lush, and the climate allowed it, the horses would be returning to familiar territory.  But things have changed in the 10,000 or so years they have been gone.  It was why they died.  It was why they migrated across the Bering Land Bridge into Eurasia.  This land could no longer sustain them.

The only way they can live in these arid ecosystems across the Great Basin is because of management.  If a species has to be extensively managed via gathers every four years, can the be qualified as native?  Native wildlife have predators.  They also have humans who hunt them.  Why is it important that these free-roaming horses be given the status of native?  They have been livestock for so many generations.  Even now, with management policies that control the population, we are still applying the concept of husbandry to their populations.  Without that control, however, the population will increase until there is nothing left for them to eat, and then it will crash.  The rangelands will be destroyed.  Sustainable populations of horses may not be able to come back.

I'm not sure under what terms a re-introduced species becomes a native one.  I think I want to do more research on this subject.  Perhaps, when I have the time, I will look at the Prezwalski horse – arguably the only true wild horse left on this planet.  Then I can make a comparison.  Initially, I can say the one difference is that one species lives on grasslands and has never been domesticated in its history, and the other has been domesticated in its past, and lives on arid rangelands...

I think my goal will be to look at this topic over winter break.  It might be beneficial to me in my research to look at a truly native wild horse...

Ramblings of right and wrong

I get so tired of talking to people who feel they are so educated about the "truth" about how many horses are out there, or the "truth" behind the reason the BLM is removing them, or the "truth" in how they are being rounded up.  Then, I get so frustrated because I try to tell them what is right once you rip all the layers of fabrication away.  Then I am frustrated further when I am told to educate myself by visiting someone else's blog!  As far as I am concerned, one will not find the answer in someone else's idea of what the truth really is.

And then...after all this frustration, I wonder about my sources.  What do they mean?  What makes them better than theirs?  The science?  They say there sources are science!  Are mine just as biased?  Who really knows the truth?  What really is going on?  Why is it two people can take the same facts and still come out with a different conclusion based on how they interpret it?  With that being the case, how do we know what the truth really is?

Are the horses being removed to be replaced with cattle?  -- I do not think so as it just does not feel right, or make any sense.  Are the horses being removed to control population?  -- Yes, I certainly believe that.  That makes sense.  Based on all my knowledge about how populations grow and what horses and large mammals can do to a landscape not accustomed to grazing, it makes sense that they (the BLM) has to act as "predator" by removing some.  Do the cattle also have to be managed?  Yes - and they are, correct?  Grazing permits control the population of cattle.  Why do cattle outnumber horses?  Is it because of the time the spend on the rangelands?  The amount of forage that is available while they are there eating with horses and native wildlife?

Maybe I should do my thesis study on cow and horse utilization of the rangelands.  Maybe it would answer some of these questions that I have, and put to rest this theory that cattle are taking over horse lands.

Why do people paint the horse as this perfect animal that could not possibly do any damage to the range?  It's all cattle -- it's all the BLMs fault.  Why can't people provide assistance instead, and approach in a helpful way, rather than a "you're doing a horrible job, do it this way."  It is no wonder that the BLM may not listen to some people.  When approached like they are doing everything wrong, of course they will get defensive and not listen to what a person might have to say. 

But when I talked on the phone with the rangeland specialist the other day, he truly wanted to use me to answer some of the questions brought up in comments they received.  That, I believe, is effort on their part to do what the public wants, to make a change, to make the program better.

Why can't "activists" find a way to help the BLM, rather than hinder them?  If they really want to help, they need to volunteer, go to school in rangeland science, wildlife management, something that will make them useful to the horses.  I know there are many advocates out there that do, and the BLM appreciates them, I'm sure.  But these people who cause all the law suits, why can't they step in and provide a helpful hand?

I am very frustrated and confused tonight.  How do we  educate people about horses on public rangelands? They believe the more sensationalized version of the story because it invokes more emotion and grabs their attention.  And that makes it hard to try and convey anything that opposes what they think is right.

And then I again question...who is right?

Can I scream?

Mesteno

Wild horses, feral horses, mustangs are viewed as pests, legends, symbols of American freedom, and the old west. They were brought here by the Spanish in the 15^th century, left to fend for themselves. In a short time, they effectively repopulated the North Americas. Few of these Spanish descendents remain in isolated herds on public rangelands – the Kigers in Oregon, the Pyors in Montana, and the Sulpher herd in Utah. Most wild horses on today's rangelands, however, are descendents of ranch horses – they are draft horses and cow ponies turned loose or escaped. Wild horses may have been North American residents for a few hundred years, but in the time scheme of ecosystem adaptions, they are anything but native and must be actively managed to protect the stability of rangelands.

Though, 14,000 years ago, they were native. It is believed that a mixture of excessive hunting and climate change contributed to their extinction. And now they've returned in much larger form than their predecessors. No longer do they live peaceably on the landscape, within the ecosystem. The land evolved without them so it can no longer sustain their high numbers. Their large hooves compact the soil. Their upper incisor teeth allow them to graze the grasses until there's nothing left. Their grazing patterns, because of an inefficient digestive system, means that they eat a lot more than other ungulates. All these impacts are new to the landscape and it struggles to thrive under their ever growing populations. With few predators – cougars, wolves, bears – their population grows at as much as twenty percent each year. What natural kills do occur is not enough to naturally manage these creatures.

In order to maintain a balance between these introduced species, the native flora and fauna, and other uses of the rangelands, wild horses must be managed. My goal for the next two years is to learn, first hand, what impacts these creatures have on the landscape, what can be done to prevent further degradation, and repair overused areas. I do not do it to argue that they do not belong. I do not do it to argue that cattle have more right to the landscape than wild horses, for they do as much damage. I do it because I want to see these horses remain. Even though they are not native species, they are a piece of American history.

I want to help manage them to coexist on the landscape with native flora and fauna, cattle, and human uses.