browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

ACTION Alert: Oppose BLM Plan to Remove Wild Horses for Massive Sheep Grazing!

Posted by on June 5, 2015

American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign
ACTION

Oppose BLM Plan to Remove Wild Horses for Massive Sheep Grazing!

Photo by Jeanne-Bencich Nations

In October 2014, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Northeast Great Basin Resource Advisory Council (RAC) recommended a humane PZP birth control pilot program for wild horses living in the Water Canyon portion of Nevada’s Antelope Herd Management Area (HMA). Now the BLM’s Ely District Office has turned that recommendation into an excuse to perpetually remove wild horses from the range to accommodate private sheep grazing – and send American taxpayers the bill. The agency is now accepting public comments on a PZP “pilot program” that would allow for continued helicopter roundups and set a limit of 25 wild horses in a 31,000-acre public land area where massive, taxpayer-subsidized sheep grazing occurs! The BLM needs to hear from YOU regarding this grossly preferential treatment of commercial livestock interests over federally protected wild horses.

Please take action today!

Comment time again to the EA in the Ely district for a so-called “Pilot Program” for PZP. The district is essentially using this “program” not to manage horses in a way that gathers data or for the “best practices” intention of management, but to keep a permittee happy.

Hank Vogler, a powerful rancher in Ely and one of the individuals responsible for the absurd state legislation to try to stop wild horses, runs over 6000 sheep. Vogler purchased the permit for the area and the Ely district wants to limit the number of wild horses to 25. It is true that the area is part of the much larger Antelope Complex, however this plan is nonsense.

a_001

 

In a 2010 interview with WHE President Laura Leigh, Vogler talked about his “mustanging” days. He talked about how many permittees simply removed, drove away or shot horses at the passage of the act to protect them in order to ensure restrictions to grazing allotments would not have “government interference.”

This interview was done as wild horses were being removed in Vogler’s allotments. Coyotes and mountain lion were also being removed. During that operation 1,398 wild horses were permanently removed and 9 died (during operations and many more died in holding). A pathetic number, 32, were PZP treated and released.

 

“One Day” of the last removal in this area

Conduct at the removal was abysmal.

AWHPC has created a click and send that we agree with. You can access it here: http://act.wildhorsepreservation.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=20540 However at WHE you know we generally encourage you to write individualized letters. BLM must sort through individual comments to see if a unique comment exists. (More on the NEPA process here: http://wildhorseeducation.org/nepa/

The EA can be found here: https://www.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do?methodName=renderDefaultPlanOrProjectSite&projectId=47287&dctmId=0b0003e88084b6ac

Comments should be sent to:

.
Fax:  (775) 289-1910 Att: Paul Podborny
U.S. Mail:
BLM Ely District Office
HC 33 Box 33500
Ely, NV 89301
Attn: Paul E. Podborny, Schell Field Manager
For more information, contact Ben Noyes, BLM Ely District wild horse and burro specialist, at(775) 289-1800(775) 289-1800.
WHE’s comment below:
Reference: DOI-BLM-NV-L020-2015-0014-EA
I am writing to express severe disappointment in what the Ely district calls a “pilot program.” There is nothing innovative present in this EA to denote the use of the phrase. Birth control is being used in many other areas. Trap site adoptions are already taking place. Prioritizing domestic livestock is status quo.
This EA is crafted to limit wild horse use as domestic livestock continue to overgraze the range. I am aware that claims of “outside the scope of this EA” will be made to this comment.  However failing to address over use by domestic livestock is a failure that must be addressed.
Range conditions in the area will continue to degrade, not from wild horse use, but from the swarm of sheep present.
This EA essentially presents a scenario where the wild horses that occupy the area will pay the price.
This EA in no way reflects best practices.
  • The NAS recommendations must be further incorporated into this EA. Including GonaCon as fertility control is not recommended by the NAS.
  • Herd migration is not clearly documented, since the fences were installed post burn. In order to ensure a genetically sound population accurate data must be present to support any removal of horses from the area.
  • A “PZP only” alternative must be presented in the analysis.

Thank you,

Laura Leigh

Wild Horse Education

 

Comments are closed.