Brett Comments On Wild Horse Issue

Sunday's post of a link to the article Judge allows wild horse roundup in Nevada has generated quite a few comments. Today's post on the same issue may do the same. One of the more reasonable posts was by regular reader Brett. I'm reposting his comments here so any further comments will hopefully adopt his manner of addressing the issue.

Brett said...

It is unfortunate that the slaughter issue, public lands use problems, and the Wild Horse program are all in one infmammatory mess here at the moment. At this point, there are a multitude of problems to address here. I will try my best, and try to avoid dragging anything else into it.

I am disappointed that those of us who do not square perfectly with the opinion of some advocates are typecast as unenlightened, selfish, cruel and hateful people. The notion of sainted advocates in white hats doing mighty battle with the dark-hatted cattle barons might make a great Western, but I think it is too manichean to square with reality.

I have never heard tell of anyone securing loans by virtue of a grazing permit. The loans in question will be secured with the herd itself as collateral. That in and of itself is not what I would term sound business, but this isn't about how I would run things. Pulling cash on the speculative value of a grazing lease, though? Perhaps such things are going on and I am not aware of it. Most of my activity with public lands type ranching are of the rosin jawed variety. I thank God for that, as I would never have the patience to handle that kind of paperwork and the continual jerking around of allotments. I would much rather handle the farming/water end and wrangle horses, personally.

The history of the horse on this continent is a fascinating study. Most things I have read on horses suggest that the horse evolved here, after which they migrated across a land bridge to Asia. Most believe that the herds in North America more or less died out, and that the creatures that took their spot in the ecosystem were bovines, specifically bison. It was not until the 1500s that horses returned courtesy of the Spanish. The Spanish deliberately turned horses loose in an effort to placate natives and reduce horse theft. The Vaqueros turned their surplus horses loose to the feral herds as well. The feral herd was seen as a resource, and it was still seen that way long after the United States gained control of what we know today as the West. It was that way right up to 1971, when the Wild Horse program started up. Ironically, the program started to preserve the legend, but the true history of the herd is dying.

The question was asked as to why nobody noticed the so-called horse population issue until ranching arrived in the area. There are probably several ways to tackle that. One way would be to point out that ranching is not exactly new in the West, having long predated the Wild Horse program's inauguration in the late twentieth century. Prior to the program, Mustangs were just another type of livestock competing for resources. Nobody gave it much more thought than that. Today, the regulations force them to. No matter. Ranchers are not averse to managing the range to accomodate competing species. A few outfits literally run both cattle and sheep.

The other approach I can think of is a bit more basal. If not for the ranchers, who are directed to manage their allotment, who exactly would notice a problem with the balance of grazing and grazing animals? They're the ones that are out there. Once again, they are caught in the middle. If it were only as easy as the stereotype suggests it is...

I hope more people from both sides comment on this situation. There needs to be a better dialogue on it, and I am not equipped to do it any better. I do know, though, that our food supply, and the health of both the dmoesticated and feral herds, depend on efficient management of the rangeland.