Click me to go home
|
Would we want our children or grandchildren to see how America's horses are treated by our public agencies? |
Alliance of Wild Horse Advocates'
|
Of the foals, two are still nursing foals held with their dams in a mare and foal corral. A third foal is the orphan. Depending on the orphan's progress over the next couple of days, it may stay with the mare and foal pairs or be turned over to one of the non-profits experienced with orphan care for rehabilitation and foster care. Other issues and opinions. AML, AUMs, et al. BLM reports that the number of horses found in the Calico Mountains Complex is 5.5 times the "low range," and 3 times the full carrying capacity of the complex. Since most of the area is non forested open range, I will assume that these population estimates are reasonably correct. This is one basis in which BLM justifies such a large gather target. To be fair, a large number of cattle have also been removed from the public lands within the complex. It was explained that most of these reductions were voluntary. There is an assumption that in some instances putting the cattle out on poor range was not economically feasible. In the discussion the usual confusion over AML, AUM and related terms arose. I will try to explain in simple terms a complex process. AML is the appropriate animal management level for horses in a herd area or herd management area, typically expressed as a range from minimum to maximum population levels. AUM is an animal unit month, or the grazing allocated to a particular animal unit for one month. One horse grazing for one month will consume one AUM. Because of a lower metabolism, one cow and her calf will consume one AUM. Smaller livestock such as sheep and goats could reach 6 or 7 animals per AUM. BLM is required by law to manage for a "thriving ecological balance." Part of the process by which BLM is supposed to achieve this objective involves assessing the carrying capacity of specific ranges (available forage,) consulting with wildlife officials regarding the amount of carrying capacity that is reduced by wildlife grazing, then determining what forage is left that can be assigned to the horse herd and calculated as AUMs allocated to seasonal grazing permits and leases. Here is where things often get confusing. An AML of 300 horses represents 300 horses grazing year-round. An AUM of 300 for livestock means that a livestock permittee or lessee can graze 100 cattle during a three month grazing season. So while it can be argued that private livestock significantly outnumber wild horses on public lands, the "face value" of numbers when comparing AML to AUM statistics do not represent accurate proportions of domestic versus free-roaming animals as an AML of "1" for horses is equal to "12" livestock AUMs. Birth control. We were advised that BLM would be providing birth control for some of the horses. Their strategy would be that those horses brought in that were in excess of the numbers scheduled for removal would be treated with PZP and released. While these intentions are good, I have a fundamental problem with this strategy. First of all, no agency is going to launch an effective program if it is carried out as an afterthought. Applying birth control if "extra" horses are trapped is overly arbitrary and does not provide for a consistent representation of the horse population to be included in the program. Understandably from BLM's position, they would be reluctant to birth control and release horses on a day when they experienced poor gather conditions and brought in few horses. However there needs to be some consideration for daily PZP application rather than simply treating the "leftovers." One alternative could be that on relatively successful gather days, one or more bands that are representative of the herd profile could be held aside in one or more of the special holding pens. If reasonable numbers have been gathered that day, the "reserved" bands could be treated, their backs marked with paint so they are not brought in again, and be released. I also found it puzzling that the only immunocontraceptive birth control methodology that was being considered involved PZP. It is not my intent to disparage PZP, but the University of Nevada Reno and the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine appear to be making some advances in the area of longer term temporary equine birth control, both for mares and stallions and BLM didn't seem to know anything about it. From observing study horses both in our organization's possession and out on the range, some of the new formulations appear promising. If BLM wants to get out of the long term holding dilemma, they have to take equine birth control more seriously and consider all options. Relocation strategies (or making use of available resources.) Long term holding is becoming the most significant drain on the Wild Horse and Burro Program budget. In Nevada there are opportunities to help mitigate this growing problem through more contemporary strategies. In a cursory review of historic range data, there appear to be at least a few HMAs with low populations where predation and other natural factors keep the herds within, or occasionally below, the established AML ranges. There may be locations where it is appropriate to boost stable populations with suitable horses from other ranges that would have otherwise gone to long term holding. In such instances restoring populations could help improve genetic viability. Given the reduction in the state predator trapping workforce due to budget cuts, predation as a means of herd population regulation may improve incrementally. While some special interests may object to horses being placed back onto public ranges, the expense of holding horses is a national issue and it makes practical sense to feed horses range grass that is already "bought and paid for" rather than board them with contractors. There have been HMAs in which the herd has been zeroed out due to issues relating to herd management. (Typically these have been areas where it is excessively dangerous to horses and/or personnel to periodically conduct gathers.) An alternative would be to reintroduce stallions to areas sufficiently isolated so that mares won't migrate into the population. Questions have been raised as to whether a herd of stallions would get along together. Our experience has been that if mares are excluded from the immediate area, the stallions typically behave like youngsters. [Citation: The Butterfield Stallions, Wild Horse Workshop 2003] The following are links to the LRTC / Wild Horse Workshop video of the BLM Butterfield stallions. Higher resolution (broadband) video Lower resolution (YouTube) video Clearly there are some opportunities to return horses to the range and at the same time save money without exacerbating the "recruitment" issue. While such options are not limitless and they will not completely resolve the long term holding dilemma, they are a step in the right direction and follow original Congressional Intent. Resource issues. BLM personnel agreed with our assessment that there were locations that had a great deal of range forage that could be available for horses and other animals however available water was the limiting issue. BLM confirmed the problems the agency experienced in obtaining water rights. In some instances water resource issues could be resolved through dual use (a use that was recognized by the Nevada Department of Water Resources that could also serve to water horses.) Such projects might require private or non-profit assistance, however such opportunities need to be brought to the table. Irrespective of population issues, the range habitat improves at low cost when those animals grazing the range can more evenly disburse their grazing pressure. Furthermore not having large numbers of animals congregateing at limited water sources could help mitigate some herd health issues. Another option would be for Congress to assert its authority over water found on or under Federal public lands to the extent that the use of such water does not materially negatively impact other users of the aquifer. Miscellaneous observations. It was my impression that neither BLM or some of the out of state visitors really knew what to expect from each other. BLM went overboard with security (which ironically was appreciated by me when I ran into vehicle trouble.) The advocacy delegates present weren't from the Animal Liberation Front. I do acknowledge that had horses actually been coming in, BLM's strict on-site safety protocols were relevant to insure the safety of the horses and people that would have been present. I have to say that the implication that if observers didn't follow directions they could be led away in handcuffs was offensive and may have instilled jaded the perceptions in some observers. BLM could benefit from adjusting its protocol message according to its "audience." People who haven't seen Nevada gathers also tend to have an expectation of more drama than actually takes place out here. While gathers aren't perfect and mistakes can be made, from my experience the Nevada crews deal with so many horses and so many gathers that they have learned how to organize things in a way that maximizes safety and minimizes risks to horses. While the weather prevented me from observing actual activities, I saw nothing to suggest that this gather departed from Nevada's usual standards. While horse advocates may not like to see so many horses permanently removed from western ranges, it is in the horses' interest for us to recognize, as well as insist on, safe and sane professionally designed gathers when those gathers do take place. Recognizing that safety is a critical concern during gather activities, I do wish to thank the Winnemucca District personnel for organizing what would have been a practical and realistic viewing opportunity, complete with a horse trailer that could have been used as a "viewing blind" next to the trap's wings where the most critical elements of the gather could be observed. Summation. The portion of the gather arrangement that I saw was reasonably well designed and did not require moving horses over extreme inclines and over or through other avoidable hazards. The transportation of the horses to the new Indian Lakes contract facility in Fallon is sensible from a number of aspects, including a shorter hauling distance for the horses. Continuing to send horses to never ending long term holding is not a sustainable practice. BLM needs to utilize available range resources where appropriate to reduce dependency on long term holding of horses. There appear to be opportunities available that would not exacerbate BLM's concerns about population growth. BLM needs to take birth control more seriously, and consider all viable and safe options for limiting herd population expansion while maximizing genetic diversity (e.g., leave a greater number of mares that each produce a fewer number of foals.) It is probable that some cost effective solutions can be developed provided BLM isn't stuck on a myopic approach. The region in which the Calico Mountains Complex is found appears to provide some opportunities where alternatives to removal (e.g., sex ratio adjustment, replenishment of depleted herds, introduction of stallion herds, releasing of gelding bands, resource development, a greater commitment to contraception options, etc.,) could be attempted. Practical and humane alternatives to sending more horses to long term holding should be encouraged by the wild horse advocacy community. Finally, the people at BLM on the ground do not formulate national public lands policies. Therefore while advocates need to utilize every opportunity to encourage new horse management approaches, we all have to understand that field activities must fall within formal parameters that field personnel are required to work under. Advocates will have to approach Congress to enact legislative changes that would clear some of the roadblocks that prevent other opportunities from being explored.
Willis Lamm, January 3, 2010
Continue to Craig Downer's ReportReturn to the previous page on this topic
|
WIDTH=500>