wild horses in danger

Nah, I'll just eat the bison....

__________________
The 7th Day is still God's Sabbath
ICOG7.ORG
Layton Hollow ADGA Nubians
Taking Reservation for 2015!

Horses are not native to the USA, and there should be no protected or wild horses. Just not an issue. Get rid of them.

As to grazing national lands, there is a lot of middle ground which makes more sense than either extreme. There are a lot of strings attached to a govt lease, which greatly lowers it's value compared to 'private' land leases. Wise use of govt land can certainly include grazing or timber harvesting, yet retaining the natural & wild feel of the entire forest.

I'm not at all sure what it is you could be worried about? Sounds like a good plan to me, where can I go to support it?

--->Paul

Just got to your second post. First off, to each their own thoughts on this, don't want to try to scream louder than the next person, and it appears you feel the same.

The horses, cattle, or humans for that matter are not native to the area.

The horses will not be extinct. There are a lot of horses around.

Just like killing off some feral cats is not always a pleasent thing, it is sometimes better for the area & indeed the long-term view of the critters themselves. You realize a lot of $$$$ resources are being spent on these wild horse herds. And there is no end to that in the current form of 'wild horse control'.

A much better use of limited resources ($$$$) is to spend that money on real, endangered, species. The horses are not endangered, these are just some feral horses.

If I had to do it, yes it is a sad job.

But, one that needs doing, and thank goodness there are people up to the task.

Thank goodness there are kind-hearted people in this world like you also. But, I believe on this issue you are wrong.

--->Paul

Horses are pretty and serve a purpose. Grazing land is for our food source. If the USDA and soft hearts would include horse meat in the American diet, then I'd say lets make room for them. However, that not being the case, they should be cleaned out and the land held for cattle.

__________________
Have a safe day, karen

Threads like this really get me thinking…and I love it. I have researched the adoption of the wild mustang for a few years. I guess I just wanted to have part of the old west. I’ve found that there are WAY too many horses out there already. If it’s not the wild horse, you have the PMU horses or the backyard breeders trying to make a buck off the popularity of having a horse. Even though I feel that government oversteps its bounds, they always seem to stop before causing too much damage. I would think that if they started thinning out the herds, they would be forced to set up a small-protected area for a certain number of our western history. I would be more concerned with what they will do with the horses they get rid of. I know that it’s a touchy subject, but it would be a waste of meat to just bury them. I’d like to see them set up a program here in the states. They could either send the meat to shelters and soup kitchens, or just send it to people who would use the meat. I think if they shipped some out to Michigan, I’d make some room in the freezer.

I know here the DNR (Dept. of Natural Resources) try to keep track of the deer population. If they cause too much damage to crops, farmers are given a permit to reduce the numbers. Maybe they could do something like that with the ranchers. Keep the horses, but keep them down to a manageable level.

"Congress finds and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; (and) that they contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people ..."
(Public Law 92-195, December 15, 1971)

__________________
The 7th Day is still God's Sabbath
ICOG7.ORG
Layton Hollow ADGA Nubians
Taking Reservation for 2015!

The Americas did have its own species of prehistoric horse that died out long before the humans came to live here. We regained horses when the Spaniards either lost some or let some loose when they landed here.

My concern is that we as humans appear to be selective as to what species have value and which are better to exterminate because they are in our way in one fashion or another. We can argue over the price of beef in the market or how much horseflesh we want to sell, however in the end what species should we allow to live and which should die?

What would cattle ranchers do if sheep ranchers wanted to use the same BLM and Forest Service land that the horses range on? Is beef more important than mutton in the marketplace? I am not trying to argue, only give brain cells exercise. Many people focus on one side or the other, but I am trying to argue both sides and perhaps a few other views to create discussion.

I am not big-time farmer or rancher and really don't want to be. I simply know that I am trying to be a good steward for my land, my livestock and share the land with the wildlife. If I have predator problems, I take care of them, but I don't go and hunt them down for the sake of killing or extermination. Killing animals simply because they are inconvenient makes as much sense as killing humans simply because they are inconvenient. Then again, in our society we do both, so perhaps I am simply stating the general social consensus. However this is not really the topic at hand.

Which lifeforms do we want to keep around? We all have different views on this. The feeling I get is that ranchers want to eliminate the wild horses. There are others who want to preserve them. The parts that concerns me is the part about basing the decision on whether they have certain genes or not and what impact they have on the environment. If we follow those arguements then we might find it acceptable to eliminate any lifeform that doesn't have the genetic features we think are important or serve our interests. Second, if how animals impact the environment, we might need to eliminate both cattle and horses as they both can destroy the vegetation, water and land.

This issue is not black and white and there is no solution, only a gamut of compromises to work with.

__________________
I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, however inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one. – Sam Harris

RP, using your logic, should we preserve smallpox? Perhaps create a refuge for it? We could feed it condemned prisoners, or maybe poor third world types?

The US and Russian governments do save samples of smallpox in quarentine labs in case of another outbreak (to create vaccine) and for research study.

If we wanted to take care of the most destructive species on the planet, I am not exaggerating when I say that human beings are the worst. We are the only lifeform that is not limited by temperature, climate, food supply or disease. Other animal life ends up dying down to sustainable levels for the environment available or it is wiped out by the environment. We overcome all natural limits.

I am simply trying to encourage discussion on this issue as we have many polarized on one side or the other of the issue with little desire, as it comes across to me, for trying to find a mutually agreeable solution.

__________________
I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, however inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one. – Sam Harris

For tinknal, RP has good thoughts here. You are being defensive about something I can't understand. 3rd world types? Prisoners?
Do you live in the U.S.? I don't know where you live but if 20 mice inhabited your house and were chewing up stuff while you are paying rent, would you complain to the landlord? I hope not. Under the circumstances here on this thread, "No" would be your answer. It's okay for the mice to chew on your belongings and nibble on your food because mice have rights too, right? But you surely would hollar, HEY! I pay the rent here. I have rights. No, says your landlord. Just pay and be quiet.....

__________________
We have now officially entered the twilight zone.

Ibcnya, I hope you realize that my tounge is firmly imbedded in my cheek. My point is that we tend to personalize these things. To a western rancher trying to eck out a living, these horses are analogous to your mice.

Actually the Russians had a ---- sight more than a sample for research. At the end of the cold war and even afterwards they were actively producing weaponized smallpox. They engineered the virus to be orders of magnitude more contagious and deadly than the natural form. They even fielded ICBM warhead based delivery systems (an amazing technical achievement) to be used against the US in the event of nuclear conflict.

The Russian biological warfare program, or to put it in more perspective, their massive military industrial biological warfare research and manufacturing complex, was more massive than the US intelligence community had ever even dreamed. It was MASSIVE, extremely innovative and decades more advanced than anything the US had even contemplated before ending their programs in 1969. The US didn't find out just how massive until one of their top scientists defected. Even then they couldn't grasp the enormity of the program. After all, the Soviets had agreed to a ban on such nastiness and surely they wouldn't lie?

Quite a interesting reading if one looks into it. Granted it will make you wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat but interesting nevertheless. Well funded scientists with the unlimited resources of the former soviet union given a free hand to see how exactly how bad, bad could be made to be. Hmmm let's cross small pox with Ebola and see what happens Dimitri......

Agreed

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6769671/


No more protection


mikell

Having owned a mustang...

I will tell you there is no horse I'd rather have. I've owned and ridden some pretty fancy quarter horses over the years, and none compared to our little mustang. She was sure footed, bomb proof, and friendly. She ate half of what her domestic counterparts ate and had feet tougher than most nails I've encountered. The most wonderful part of these animals is that they haven't developed according to our human conception of beauty, but have developed naturally into some very impressive animals who have beaten out the competion in dressage arenas and reining competitions.

I don't have a problem with horses being eaten any more than beef, lamb or dog, quite frankly. I do have a problem with the inhumane treatment that so often follows. Feedlots of domestic animals are guilty of poor treatment, imagine dealing with an animal filled with fear.

I had a link to the bill but it doesn't seem to be valid any longer. From what I recall, horses over 10 who haven't been adopted after three tries are the ones to go. Basically, there aren't enough natural predators for these animals, so either they get adopted or they die of starvation...yet another lovely alternative to slaughter. Take your pick. Neither is a lovely way to go.

If you really want to help, either adopt a mustang or support an organization that takes in those hard to adopt animals. But be careful in your selection~there are those who adopt, then breed their own herds and ask for your money to support them.

Link Works for me

mikell