Newswise — A new study, spearheaded by scholars from the University of Wyoming and Oklahoma State University, argues that the current approach of the U.S. federal government to handling wild horses will inevitably collapse unless there are significant alterations to policy and legislation.
The article appearing in the journal BioScience contends that the government's present programs are destined to fail because of conflicting societal perspectives that treat horses on the range as both wildlife and pets or livestock.
The scientists stated in the article that in order for the federal government to maintain the well-being of horse populations, the environment, and financial responsibility, it is crucial for lawmakers to accurately designate how feral equids should be categorized. They noted that each label (wild, livestock, pet) has merit and that management strategies can be established to optimize equid populations in conjunction with other land uses. Moreover, clarifying the definition of feral equids will determine the legal means that can be employed for their management.
The primary author of the paper is Jacob Hennig, a postdoctoral researcher at Oklahoma State University and a former Ph.D. student at the University of Wyoming. Co-authors of the paper include his former advisors at UW, Professor Jeff Beck and Associate Professor Derek Scasta from the Department of Ecosystem Science and Management. Additionally, Oklahoma State University Professor Sam Fuhlendorf and Assistant Professor Courtney Duchardt, a previous Ph.D. student at UW, along with Saeideh Esmaeili, a former Ph.D. student at UW and now a research scientist at Colorado State University, and Tolani Francisco from Native Healing LLC in New Mexico, are also co-authors of the paper.
According to the researchers, although the fossil record demonstrates the presence of horses in North America in the past, they became extinct around 10,000 years ago.
The paper highlights that the equids currently residing in North America did not evolve there; rather, they are descendants of livestock that underwent thousands of years of domestication and selective breeding. Furthermore, it states that most of the large predators that would have curbed their population growth became extinct at the conclusion of the Pleistocene epoch, and the present Anthropocene epoch has led to further reductions in predators.
The researchers assert that due to wild horses lacking natural predators, being protected from hunting by federal law, and no longer being slaughtered as livestock in the U.S., their population on the range has increased by over two-fold in the past decade. Additionally, they state that horses taken from the range by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and kept in government facilities and private lands have increased in number by 33 percent during this period. Furthermore, the BLM has spent more than $550 million since 2013 to sustain the captive animals.
The paper acknowledges that "the BLM has augmented the number of horses extracted from the wild in each of the last four years, resulting in a decline in the on-range population." Nevertheless, the total population on the range remains around 50,000 horses beyond the maximum appropriate management level. The paper further notes that the recent modest reduction in the on-range population is directly linked to an increase in the off-range population and, consequently, greater expenses.
According to the researchers, relocating wild horses from Western rangelands to long-term holding is not a viable solution. They assert that this approach merely moves the problem elsewhere, including to endangered tallgrass prairie ecosystems, with unknown ecological impacts. The paper points out that there are now approximately 23,500 wild horses on private lands in Oklahoma, which is five times more than the number of horses on open range in Wyoming.
The paper contends that wild horses have a substantial impact on the range, as they consume more forage and water per capita than ruminants such as cattle.
The scientists recognize the BLM for using scientific research as a basis for recent management decisions, such as improving population estimates of wild horses and implementing measures to inhibit their reproduction. However, they argue that there are too many horses on the range for this approach to be effective.
The researchers wrote that "although the BLM has commendably enhanced fertility control research and its implementation, this approach is bound to be a futile task if they cannot also eliminate tens of thousands of equids."
The Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 mandates that wild horses roam freely like wildlife, but they are not considered to be the same as wild animals as the act forbids hunting them. However, the BLM's practice of gathering and removing wild horses from the range is more akin to livestock operations than wildlife management, and the implementation of adoption programs, sales restrictions, and the elimination of slaughter has resulted in feral equids being treated as pets by society, according to the paper.
The researchers suggest that selecting a single label from the three options (wild, livestock, or pets) may be the key to achieving success in the management of wild horses by the federal government.
The paper suggests that by choosing one of the labels, the federal government can then implement management plans to optimize equid populations with other land uses, ensuring ecosystem health, fiscal responsibility, and the sustainability of equids. The authors further suggest that the selection of a label would determine the legal tools that can be applied to manage the population of feral equids. For example, if labeled as wild, a hunting or culling program could slow their population growth. If labeled as livestock, gathers and removals that lead to sale or slaughter would limit growth and give the animals the monetary value they currently lack. If labeled as pets, large-scale removals and administering fertility control, including permanent sterilization (and potentially euthanasia), could reduce population sizes and slow growth.
The researchers’ conclusion?
That is the conclusion of the paper, which suggests that the U.S. government should make a decision on how to classify feral horses and burros and provide the necessary resources and legal authority to manage them accordingly. The authors argue that without fundamental changes to the law and management practices, the current situation is unsustainable and will continue to be a drain on resources.
RSS