BLM's Final Solution for the  Wild Horses and Burros
Originally Posted Dec 21, 2009 by Laura Allen
©  Copyright Elyse Gardner
Horse  Slaughter Information provided courtesy of Valerie  James-Patton and Equine Welfare Alliance, http://www.equinewelfarealliance.org/
Internal documents from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)  shed light on the agency's motives and plans for the wild horses and  burros.
Two reports issued by the BLM for internal use only, The  
Herd Management Option Plans from October 2008, and the 
Team  Conference Calls Report from July-September 2008 contain  astonishing proposals to manipulate the WFRHBA and NEPA, eliminate the  wild horses and burros altogether from the wild, and until they can be  euthanized or sold most likely for slaughter, sterilize them 
and  place them in feedlots paid for by rescue organizations duped into  thinking the animals are in private "preserves".
BLM is the agency within the U.S. Department of Interior that is  tasked with protecting the wild horses and burros pursuant to the Wild  Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, 
16 U.S.C. §1331 et seq.  (WFRHBA) as free roaming animals in their historic herd areas and  designated ranges. "All management activities are to be at the minimal  feasible level." 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1333. Wild horses are not to be subject  to "capture, "harassment" or "death". 16 U.S.C. Sec. 1331
BLM team members involved in these discussions included Jim Stratton,  Rob Jeffers, Al Kane, DVM; Jim Johnson, John Neil, Lili Thomas, Gus  Ward, Alan Shepherd, Bud Cribley, and Don Glenn.
These reports are almost certainly the precursor to 
BLM's  current proposal issued by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar in October,  2009. The plan as announced is essentially to:
(1) work with non-profits and  wild horse enthusiasts to create  "preserves" in the Midwest or east, an idea that runs counter to the   WFRHBA mandate to maintain free-roaming behavior and avoid zoolike  settings for these wild animals,
(2) designate additional ranges that under WFRHBA are to be "devoted  principally" to the wild horses and burros, but under BLM they have been  afforded the same or even less preference than grazing cattle and sheep  and other uses of the land, and
(3) work to restore the "sustainability" of herds and 
public lands  which, translated  from BLM-speak, means more slaughter and euthanasia  of wild horses and burros and extinction of the herds through continued  removal of  wild horses from their herd areas and ranges, aggressive  "fertility control", monitoring of sex ratios, and introduction of  non-reproducing herds.
This proposal is floating around Congress and the Obama  Administration. There has been no indication there will be a hearing or  any changes made to the laws or authorization of appropriations that may  be necessary to implement the plan. The full plan has never even been  made generally available to the public.
Indeed, BLM has already begun to implement this plan.   The removal or gather schedules for 2009-2010 are aggressive, and BLM  has shown no signs of reconsidering these plans despite
 increasing  calls for a moratorium on gathers and a 
pending  request for a preliminary injunction on a large gather of 2,432-2,736  wild horses in Nevada set to begin December 28.  Indeed, just a  couple of days ago, BLM announced plans to roundup 1,977 wild horses and  remove 1,506 from the Antelope Complex in Nevada. The BLM has yet to  issue the Environmental Assessment for this action.
And, earlier during the first week in December, without any public  announcement, BLM rounded up 217 wild horses on the Nevada-California  border. This gather of what are known as the Buckhorn wild horses had  been scheduled for the summer, 2010. The roundup was conducted in  secret, and it is not known how many horses were injured or killed or  what happened to them.
Currently, allegedly "excess" horses, those deemed necessary to  remove from designated herd areas or ranges basically because of  overpopulation or to "maintain a thriving natural ecological balance",  are generally held in short-term (STH) or long-term holding facilities  (LTH) on private lands. 16 U.S.C. §§1332, 1333 As of May 31, 2009 there  were 8,532 horses and 57 burros in short-term holding facilities that  have a total capacity of 15,645 animals. As of that date there were  22,126 horses in long-term holding facilities that have a total capacity  of 22,100. The long-term holding facilities are full. BLM claims there  are 10,350 excess wild horses and burros that must be removed from herd  areas and ranges. Since 2000, BLM has removed more than 74,000 wild  horses and burros from the wild, 40% of the population.
Manipulating the WFRHBA
In these 2008 reports BLM employees and consultants discussed placing  the wild horses and burros in LTH facilities on public lands by  converting grazing rights for cattle. To do this legally, requires  changing the status of the horses and burros from wild to titled or  owned livestock. The WFRHBA protects wild horses on public lands,  meaning they can't be corralled in LTH there.  BLM team members  discussed that to keep the animals in LTH on public lands, they would  create non-reproducing herds:  
"One could argue that a  non-reproductive herd is not self-sustaining. Also refer to [43 CFR  4700.0-6  (c]) which states: "Management activities affecting wild  horses and burros shall be undertaken with the goal of maintaining  free-roaming behavior." By managing for sterile animals we may be  taking away their 
"free-roaming" behavior by altering the  social interactions."  If the animals are no longer ‘free-roaming", they  are not wild and arguably could be considered livestock and kept in LTH  on public lands.
In effect, BLM proposed to manipulate the WFRHBA by actually  intentionally destroying herd behavior, free-roaming behavior, which as  an agency they are supposed to protect, so that they could get around  another provision of WFRHBA to allow the horses to be kept in LTH on  public lands.
BLM team members also considered ignoring the WFRHBA prohibition  on"relocat[ing] wild free-roaming horses and burros to areas of the  public lands where they do not exist" but noted,  "However, a  solicitor's interpretation concludes BLM is not prohibited from moving  excess wild horses to LTH areas on public lands because no case law  implies such a prohibition. Should BLM elect to move excess horses to  LTH areas on public lands, appeals or litigation would be likely and  could take years to resolve."
BLM team members discussed that the LTH facilities could be nothing  more than feedlots. "BLM (or others? ie horse advocacy groups? would buy  livestock permits with the objective of managing the allotments for a  non-reproducing herd. Due to trouble finding additional pastures for  excess horses, we may need to have feed lots. If the humane organization  did take over payment of feeding excess horses they would need to pay  for whatever type of facility is available."
Note that BLM's current plan as described by Interior Secy. Salazar,  calls, in part, for humane groups to take over the cost and care of wild  horses and burros placed in "preserves" in the midwest and eastern  states. "Preserves" is presumably a euphemism for "feed lot".
In this way, BLM would also manage the animals to extinction. The BLM  team member discussed, though, "This alternative may require a change  in regulations based on 43 CFR 4700.0-6 (a), which states: "Wild horses  and burros shall be managed as self-sustaining populations of healthy  animals in balance with other uses and the productive capacity of their  habitat."
Actually, for this plan to be legal, Congress would be required to  repeal the WFRHBA requirements that BLM manage wild horses and burros as  free-roaming "components" of the public lands at the "minimal feasible  level" and avoid "capture", "harassment" and "death". 16 U.S.C. § §1331,  1332, 1333.
©  Copyright Elyse Gardner
Aggressive sterilization and manipulation of herd ratios
Other plans discussed by the BLM team to reduce the wild horse and  burro populations included adjusting herd ratios from 50/50 to 70/30  male/female ratios with some of the horses returned to the wild after  being gelded and an increased use of PZP, as well as using other  unauthorized fertility drugs called Gonacon and SpayVac.
Team members acknowledged Spayvac was "barely available" for  research, let alone approved for use as a contraceptive.
With PZP the BLM Instruction Memorandum requires field officials to  consider using fertility control and justify when it is not used. During  a June 15, 2009 meeting the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board noted  the liquid the longer term effectiveness of the pelleted form of PZP is  unproven. It is also well known that PZP may cause out of season foals.
In the 2008 team reports, BLM team members noted, "This alternative  may require a change in regulations based on 43 CFR 4700.0-6 (a), which  states: "Wild horses and burros shall be managed as self-sustaining  populations of healthy animals in balance with other uses and the  productive capacity of their habitat.  ...One could argue that a  non-reproductive herd is not self-sustaining.  Also refer to (c) which  states: "Management activities affecting wild horses and burros shall be  undertaken with the goal of maintaining free-roaming behavior." By  managing for sterile animals we may be taking away their "free-roaming"  behavior by altering the social interactions."
Despite the clear language of WFRHBA and some of its own regulations,  the BLM team asked,  "Do we have an obligation not to affect horse herd  behavior?...Does it affect behavior and do we care? Burger stated in  the late 80's that you should aim at a ratio favoring females, but BLM  thinks a 50/50 ratio is natural. Would having more stallions change the  band structure, will mares and colts be beaten down at water  bottlenecks? Since we do not have any evidence [changing the sex ratio]  is bad, the BLM should be allowed to do this on a large scale. We do not  know if it is bad so should we wait until we know?"
BLM team members discussed options such as filling herd areas with  only geldings or sterilizing all mares. BLM also discussed placing wild  horses in non-reproducing herds and wanted to look in each state for  possible places for these herds.
In one discussion team members proposed it would be easier to  "justify" a non-reproducing herd rather than zeroing out herd areas.
The idea was to eliminate a herd management area for every  non-reproducing herd area that was created.
The team noted, "When making changes on HMAs (sex ratio, gelding,  etc) the implementation would be a trial and error".
BLM knew the aggressive sterilization of mares would mean an  increased death rate of at least 10% and admitted that "herd behavior  would be out the window". BLM admitted, in effect, these aggressive  sterilization plans would not only be potentially dangerous to the wild  horses and burros, destructive of their herds and families, but also  illegal and ultimately cause their extinction.
Euthanasia and Slaughter
The BLM team's favorite ideas for eliminating wild horses and burros  appear to be euthanasia preferably in the field and also by reducing  restrictions on sales.
  
The team considered, 
"How many could be euthanized at a gather  without having a NEPA?" The BLM is required by National  Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321, et seq., to  prepare Environmental Assessments or EAs or, if indicated, Environmental  Impact Statements (EIS) or Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI),  for any proposed changes to public lands that may have a significant  environmental impact.  The law directs the agency to identify  environmental concerns, consider alternatives including no action at all  and take a "hard look" at the problem and minimize significant  environmental impact. A significant environmental impact includes  actions that are likely to be highly controversial or have uncertain  effects on the quality of our lives and that affect cultural and  historical resources. 40 C.F.R. §1508.27(b).)
In other words, BLM hoped to be able to kill as many wild  horses and burros in the field as possible without implicating NEPA.
BLM also discussed drastically reducing the time wild horses and  burros are available for adoption or sale before they would then be  euthanized.
The team observed, 
"People willing to put down healthy  horses at gather sites could be a problem....Having vets put down  healthy horses at preparation facilities could be a problem...Provide  counseling due to stress for employees and contractors that have to  euthanize healthy horses".
Team members also asked how many more horses could be euthanized  without affecting disposal practices. It was noted that Reno Rendering,  for example, 
"will take as many as could be sent". They checked  on the capacity of other rendering plants to take more wild horses.
One team member questioned, 
"Are we euthanizing horses to save  money to complete gathers?"
Under the WFRHBA,  "[a]ny excess animal or the remains of an excess  animal shall be sold if--
      (A) the excess animal is more than  10 years of age; or
      (B) the excess animal has been offered  unsuccessfully for adoption at least 3 times." Currently, a wild horse  or burro must be offered for adoption at 3 specific satellite or  adoption events before qualifying for sale under subsection (B). Wild  horses and burros sold in this way are called 3 strikes horses. Animals  sold under this provision lose the protections of the WFRHBA. 16 U.S.C.  §1333(e).
Adopters can take possession of 4 wild horses or burros at a time and  title is not transferred for at least one year. 16 U.S.C. §1333(c) Only  then do the wild horses or burros lose the protections of WFRHBA.
The team notes indicate, 
"The team needs to address selling  horses without limitation....We need to make horses easier to [sell] by  changing our policy on the criteria for what constitutes a three strikes  horse."
The team discussed selling eligible horses at the gather site.
The team discussed that a horse would get a "strike" after each  adoption event and also each 30 day period where a facility is open to  the public by walk up or by appointment. In that way, BLM could say the  horse had been offered unsuccessfully for adoption at least 3 times for a  period of 30 days, even if no one ever even looked at the horse let  alone considered the animal for adoption. After the third 30 day period  of unsuccessful adoption offers, the horse would be euthanized on day  31.
A note from a team member states, "Sally had an e-mail from a person  in Canada who wants 10,000 horses that he would slaughter the horses and  send them to a third world country.  Don is going to send the  email....Making horses easier to sale by changing policy on the criteria  for what constitutes a 3 strike horse, which could be horses that have  been in facility for 90 days or 3 weeks. Jim said he has a demand for  horses going to Denmark, but they are having a problem getting titled  horses."
Another note advises, 
"Address the need for congress to change  the adoption law and allow instant title."
Notes from a June 15, 2009 Wild Horse and Burros Advisory Board  meeting indicate "that BLM [should]advertise and market sale eligible  animals (with the intent clause) in foreign countries with known good  homes by offering "select sales" for sale eligible animals 11 years of  age and over, and for younger animals that have been offered for  adoption three times during a 90 day period and that BLM continue to  explore opportunities to foster foreign aid by providing sale eligible  animals (with the intent clause) to foreign countries for agricultural  (nonfood) use."
Only BLM would call a slaughter house a "known good home". The BLM is  obviously in contact with kill buyers, those that buy horses and  transport and sell them to slaughter houses. Despite the mandate of the  WFRHBA, BLM, the agency charged with protecting wild horses and burros  as free roaming components of the public lands at the "minimal feasible  level" is clearly attempting to smooth the way for their slaughter.
During its discussions in the past year BLM considered ways to keep  the public away from round ups and the killing and sales of healthy  horses and burros and planned to brand protests as "eco-terrorism".   This was all to be done in secret. Unless Congress or the courts step up  and stop this rogue agency, it looks like BLM's plan may succeed.
©  Copyright Elyse Gardner
©  Copyright Craig Downer
Go  here for information about the WFRHBA and how BLM has eroded the  protections for the wild horses and burros. 
Go  here to find out how you can join the call for a moratorium on BLM  roundups of wild horses and burros.