It’s just a matter of policy . . .
Is the New Energy Frontier in conflict with wild horses on public land?
Reply
Tag Archives: mustangs
Why did the feds roundup the Diamond wild horses?
BLM Nevada News
Battle Mountain District Office, No. 2013-21
Release: September 20, 2013
Contact: Jon Sherve, 775-635-4164, email: jsherve@blm.gov
BLM Seeks Public Comments on the Environmental Assessment
for the Copper Basin Exploration Project
Battle Mountain, NV – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Mount Lewis Field Office is seeking public comments on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for a proposed Copper Basin Exploration Project that would be located five miles south of Battle Mountain, NV.
Newmont Mining Company has submitted a Plan of Operations to conduct an exploration drilling and trenching project. Newmont is proposing to disturb up to 200 acres of their project area which encompasses 3,169 acres. The disturbance would include roads, overland travel, drill pads, and trenches.
The comment period begins September 23, 2013 and ends October 23, 2013. Written comments received during this 30-day period will be considered during the decision-making process. The EA may be viewed at: http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/battle_mountain_field.html or a printed copy can be picked up at the Battle Mountain District Office at 50 Bastian Road, Battle Mountain, NV.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, be advised, that your entire comment — including your personal identifying information — may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Questions and written comments should be mailed to David Djikine, Project Lead, 50 Bastian Road, Battle Mountain, NV 89820 or emailed to ddjikine@blm.gov.
-BLM-
Battle Mountain Mineral Assessment Report
and
1.2 RENEWABLE ENERGY-RELATED BLM POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
At the time of writing of this report, the BLM’s solar and wind energy is directed by the regulations and executive orders listed below. The policies and procedures cited in this report are applicable at the time of writing but are expected to evolve over the timeframe of the RMP. The right-of-way (ROW) authorization process, which is required for solar and wind projects, is also expected to change over time.
As of 2013, the BLM’s renewable energy policy is directed by the following regulations and executive orders:
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Title II, Sec. 211), which requires the US Department of the Interior to approve at least 10,000 megawatts of renewable energy on public lands by 2015
Executive Order 13212, Actions to Expedite Energy-Related Projects, which requires federal agencies to expedite review of energy project applications
Secretarial Order 3285, which requires the US Department of the Interior to identify and prioritize specific locations best suited for large-scale renewable energy production
BLM considers plan to intensify fertility program for wild horses
September 4, 2013
The BLM is considering a modification to the current fertility plan it uses to control the number of horses on the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range. The new plan will significantly increase the number of mares darted with the fertility drug PZP.
Photographer Kassi Renner captures a great image during a rare sighting of the famous stallion Cloud as he takes a flying leap across some rocks on the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range.
Courtesy photo
According to language in a scoping report released in the spring of 2013, the goal of the new plan is to treat “nearly all of the mares” on the range with the fertility drug, theoretically rendering them infertile for a period of time. Currently a group of mares in the 5-10-year-old range are not treated with the drug and remain able to reproduce on the range.
Since the 31,000-acre range is fenced, the number of horses must be kept in check to prevent a negative impact on the land and to preserve the limited resources the horses themselves require for their own survival. The BLM plan is to maintain an appropriate management level (AML) of 90-120 wild horses on the range, by means of a carefully planned fertility program.
The original fertility plan, which was implemented in May of 2009, calls for treating a significant number of mares using a system of darting the horses with the drug PZP, which, in theory, renders the mares infertile for one breeding period (approximately one year).
The mares must first be primed with one dose and then darted with second dose before they are rendered infertile. In the opinion of some wild horse advocates, like Matthew Dillon of the Pryor Mountain Wild Mustang Center (PMWMC) in Lovell, not darting the mares in the 5-10-year-old cohort preserves the long-range survival of the herd by preserving certain historic blood lines and maintaining genetic diversity of the herd. Dillon has worked very closely with the BLM in recent years to share his extensive knowledge about the various bloodlines and has made many recommendations to the BLM (which they have adopted) regarding which horses can be safely removed from the range to preserve those bloodlines. He noted that the use of PZP is not a foolproof system and has in a few instances rendered mares completely infertile after just one dose and in other cases not rendered certain mares infertile at all. Mares that have received repeated doses have sometimes lost their ability to reproduce altogether.
“One of the reasons we don’t like the modified program is that we know anything can happen out there on the range,” said Dillon. “Right now we are not having a lot of foal deaths, but that can change. One of the reasons we like the conservative approach of the current program is that we always have that core group of mares that we can count on to reproduce if repopulating becomes necessary due to some natural cause.”
Dillon said he prefers to see the BLM stick to the more conservative approach by leaving certain mares out of the program and doing smaller gathers of 10 or fewer horses to manage the herd.
The PMWMC went on record with the BLM this week in a letter signed by all of its board members expressing their opposition to the plan, stating that “the long-term sustainability of the herd should be the primary management goal…with maintaining primary bloodlines as an objective.”
“I think the plan puts the needs of the horses being removed above the needs of the horses remaining on the range,” said PMWMC board member Nancy Cerroni.
Cerroni acknowledged that the typical 50 horses removed in a gather can be difficult to adopt out, but she said she believes that finding more adoptive homes is the answer, not limiting the breeding population.
“I really don’t think we’ve tapped into all of the avenues for adopting in today’s horse world,” she said. “I think if the problem is getting the horses adopted out that are removed from the range, we should work on that problem as opposed to creating a new problem with a more aggressive fertility program.”
The existing five-year plan, which is scheduled to end in 2015 has significantly reduced the number of horses on the range, but it has not eliminated the need for gathers and the subsequent need to adopt out the horses removed from the range. Some advocates like Ginger Kathrens of the Cloud Foundation, a wild horse advocacy group based in Colorado, say the adoption process has become problematic in that it is becoming more and more difficult to find homes for the horses that are taken off the range. Kathrens, who in the past has been adamantly opposed to the use of PZP on the mares, went so far as to recommend an increase in the number of mares that are darted with PZP in order to reduce the need for removal of horses from the range.
“I am concerned about how difficult it was to get the last group of horses adopted out that were removed from the range during the most recent gather in 2012,” said Kathrens. “In 2009, I saw about 100 people at the auction looking to adopt horses. This year it was more like 40 and many of those were from the same family. There were many instances where horses were not being bid on at all, and some were going for as little as $125. I had to get on the phone and call everyone I knew to get the horses adopted out this time. I just don’t know that I can do that again. That’s why I suggested a more aggressive treatment program using PZP. It’s the only alternative I see right now that is in the best interest of the horses.”
Kathrens said her preference would be to allow nature to take its course, with herd reduction occurring through predation by mountain lions. She noted that more frequent hunting of mountain lions in recent years has significantly impacted that natural cycle, causing more foals to survive than would normally occur.
“My preference would be to see the fence come down, a bigger population of active predators like mountain lions controlling the size of the herd and a return to survival of the fittest,” said Kathrens. “Unfortunately, that’s not realistic right now.”
She noted that, ironically, she is involved in a lawsuit against the BLM regarding the fence but feels she is forced to actually collaborate with them on the issue of the fertility program in the best interest of the horses.
“I think it’s best for horses to live and die on the range,” said Kathrens. “Even in cases where that horse, as a foal, may only live a few days. It is, in my opinion, better for that horse to have lived and died on the range.”
Kathrens sent a letter to the BLM on behalf of the Cloud Foundation in the spring stating, “The Cloud Foundation (TCF) recommends the more effective use of the well-vetted, remotely delivered, reversible one-year vaccine, PZP (Porcine Zona Pellucida) for mares in the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range (PMWHR), with the goal of eliminating removals or limiting future removals to 10 young horses or fewer every four or five years.”
The BLM incorporated the Cloud Foundation’s suggestion to increase utilization of the PZP program in their new plan, which calls for modifying the current fertility control prescription to apply fertility control to “nearly every mare on the PMWHR through 2015 in order to help maintain the appropriate management level of 90-120 wild horses and to reduce the need for a large scale gather.
Kathrens said the goal of TCF is to see mortality and reproduction of the herd roughly equal over time. She referred to this as a type of “on the range management,” that TCF advocates for all the herds, not just the Pryor Mountain herd.
“We advocate for the protection of predators–as a form of natural management,” she explained. “From 2001 to 2005, this objective was met on the Pryors, until BLM managers encouraged the hunting of mountain lions and the natural balance was destroyed.”
The modified plan is under a 30-day public review and comment that will end on Sept. 6, 2013. If adopted, the plan will immediately go into effect in September of 2013.
Kristen Lenhardt of the BLM said that the public comment gathering by the BLM during the review period is taken very seriously and is oftentimes incorporated into the final decision made by the BLM.
“Now is a critical time frame for the public to comment,” said Lenhardt. “We encourage the public to submit their comments and suggestions so we can take them into consideration when making this important decision.”
The documents are available for public review on the Billings field office of the BLM website: http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/fo/billings_field_office/wildhorses/pryorherd.html. Instructions for submitting comments are also available on that website.
by Patti Carpenter
Help The Pryor Herd Today!
Cross-posted from: http://wildinthepryors.com/2013/09/03/help-the-pryor-herd-today/
This is not just CLOUD’S HERD, but the PRYOR HERD. There are so many more horses that deserve just as much if not more attention. This herd is now in danger of being “managed to extinction” by PZP. A phrase that The Cloud Foundation used to live by.
Nye
In 2010 The Cloud Foundation released this:
Observations of PZP contraceptive use in the Pryors
Cross-posted from The Cloud Foundation
TCF does not support or recommend the continued use of the experimental immunocontraceptive drug, PZP, for the Pryor Wild Horse Herd because the drug continues to have an unusual and unpredictable impact on the mares that have received the drug.
PZP treatment was first administered to young females (seven yearlings and one two-year-old) in 2001 when they were given shots in the corrals after a roundup in September 2001. The drug was designed to extend one year of infertility to this group. It was given in two consecutive years. The second year the drug was administered via field darting.
Of these eight young mares, one died and four have foaled. The only two-year-old, Moshi, foaled in 2002, as she was already pregnant. Moshi didn’t foal again for 6 years until her out-of-season filly was born in September 2008.
Of the six remaining yearlings, four have produced a foal. Of the four foals, three were born in September. Administration of PZP was stopped on younger mares in 2005 due to a natural decrease in population largely because of mountain lion predation, and the unexpected absence of foal production by the young mares.
Nearly 50% of the young mares receiving the drug in the years 2001-2004 have never foaled. Of the 34 young mares to receive the drug between 2001-2004, 11 have died, 13 have foaled and 12 have not foaled. Two veterinarians (from Switzerland and Colorado) have independently expressed the same concern to us: mares not producing foals at a typically younger age (i.e. three-seven years) will have a more difficult time conceiving. They point out that this is true not just in horses but in humans as well as other species.
Of the 13 young mares that have foaled, eight foals have been born out of season, including three in September of 2008 alone. One foal born in September, never grew to full-size and was subsequently bait trapped and adopted out in September 2006. Another foal, born to Cecelia, #2224, a mare darted as a yearling and two-year-old in 2003 and 2004, was born in December of 2006. The majority of Pryor Mountain mares foal from May 15- June 15.She didn’t foal in 2007 and then foaled in September of 2008.
Photo evidence attests to the masculine and aggressive behavior of certain PZPed fillies as well as the masculine appearance of Aurora #2036. She has a stallion-like cresty neck and physique. It is obvious that the hormones of these young mares have been altered by PZP.
Of 21 older mares (11 years of age and older) given PZP from 2003-2007, 57% or 12 mares have foaled in spite of the field darting with Porcine Zona Pellucida. Only 43% or nine mares have not foaled (drug worked as designed). One mare, Tonopah #8603, produced a foal at the age of 21 in 2007.
Aside from the cruelty of raising a newborn foal going into a Montana winter, the drug has had other negative side effects in the form of abscesses, bleeding, and swelling on the hips of field darted mares. Of the 54 mares listed on the PMWHR Injection and Reaction Observations –updated June 2007 (BLM-03262), 41 mares are listed with swelling, nodules, bleeding or a combination of all these. 20 mares still have visible signs of nodules even years after they were injected. One mare, Hightail #8901, had an abscess from darting in 2007 which has since healed on its own.
Phoenix #9104 had a major wound at the location of an injection site lump from the last field darting prior to the observed wound. Photo comparisons indicate the wound, which appeared in June 2007 matches the left hip nodule from a previous darting with PZP. (Photos included). The mare and her foal were captured and treated in the corrals at the base of the mountain. Upon release to her band, the abscess looked to be healing although the mare had lost weight while in the Britton Springs corrals. Despite continued weight loss, the mare survived a long winter with deep snow at times, and looks remarkably fit at present.
The BLM has reported that density dependence (the ability for a wildlife population to self-regulate its numbers based on available resources) and compensatory reproduction (over-production by females to increase an under-represented population) have taken place on the Pryor Wild Horse Range. In other words the older mares that continue to reproduce despite the use of PZP are responding to an under-population. Generally the core reproducers as well as the older females share this burden. One older mare, Madonna #8913, who has been darted with PZP yearly since 2003, foaled in June 2007. The foal appeared to have trouble suckling and milk ran out its nose when nursing. The foal likely died during the night, as she was not with her mother the following morning.
To our knowledge this is the only herd in the West to receive PZP via field darts (Assateague Island off the coast of Virginia uses field darts with few reported problems). We believe that the many problems with swelling, bleeding and abscessing may be partially blamed on field darting. The projectile is shot through unclean surfaces on the hips of the mares.
Of the original group of young mares given the shot by hand while in the corrals, only one had any swelling. The other seven had no swelling, nodules or abscesses. This compares with 41 of 54 mares (a staggering 76%) with reported swelling, nodules and bleeding from at least one field darting experience. 43% of the mares darted in 2007 have nodules or bleeding and one mare had an abscess (Hightail #8901).
According to scientific reports, not all darts are recovered. Some needles may break off and remain in the mare where they could cause later abscessing. Significant problems may not be immediately observed, rather bacteria may linger and the problem area might be walled-off for some time then suddenly emerge as in the case of Phoenix #9104. This was mentioned as a possibility by four of the six equine veterinarians with whom we consulted. These veterinarians practice in California, Oregon, and Colorado and were asked for their opinions regarding the efficacy of field darting mares in the PMWHR, the potential hazards of this practice, and the possibility for a late abscess to appear months after the darting. One veterinarian expressed concern that the mare was darted again, thereby placing more strain on the immune system. Phoenix is one of the older mares who has produced a foal despite being darted.
Ironically, the initial stated reason for the administration of PZP by BLM was “purely from the standpoint of compassionate use”. Compassionate use was defined as “the use of the tool (or in this case a fertility control agent) to improve the quality of life of another (in this case younger or older wild mares).” (BLM Field Manager, Sandra S. Brooks-June 3, 2004). BLM sought to prolong the life of the older mares by causing them not to foal and to delay the foaling of the younger mares for one year.
The stated goal of the scientific community regarding an ideal wild horse fertility control agent was that it should be “at least 90% effective” (Wild Horse Contraceptive Research document, 1991 USGS website, posted 2-21-06). While the drug appears to be over 90% effective on Assateague Island, it has not performed in a similar manner in the Pryors. It has not prevented the foaling by a majority of the older mares and it has prevented foaling by the majority of the younger mares, in some cases, for seven years.
Most importantly, instead of trying to manage the Pryor Mountain Wild Horses in a natural way, allowing for a predator-prey balance and only conducting a roundup when truly necessary, wild horse managers opt for the use of PZP in combination with helicopter roundups and bait trapping. These policies threaten the health of the unique Spanish mustangs of the Pryor Mountains.
In addition to the statistical analysis of PZP use, it is hard not to comment on the social stress placed on both mares and their bands stallions when the mares cycle monthly and are repeatedly bred but do not settle. In July of 2008, we witnessed one young mare (#2315) being bred three times in a fifteen-minute period while she struggled to get away. Mares that cycle monthly attract the attention of bachelors and other band stallions on a regular basis and the stallion expends energy both in defense of his mare and in breeding her. This social unrest has not been reported on Assateague Island, but is easily observed in the Pryors, when individual horse bands come in close proximity to each other during the summer months.
Nirvana
Now they issue this:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Maneulita
You can Click TCF to read the original post. I ask TCF to explain.
The Pryor Mountain Wild Mustang Center has released their comment and concerns for this proposal. These folks have had years more experience with these horses then TCF. I ask you to please read their comment and compare. Click on PMWMC to read it. Then ask yourself: ”Who Knows This Herd Best?”
This is the comment I sent in. While I do agree and work with PMWMC, I am still asking for no change to the current program at this time.
August 28, 2013
Jim Sparks, Field Manager BLM Billings Field Office 5001 Southgate Drive Billings, MT 59101
Dear Mr. Sparks,
I am writing in regard to the Bureau of Land Management’s recently released Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range Fertility Control Modification Preliminary Environmental Assessment August 2013 (DOI-BLM-MT-0010-2013-0034-EA).
I am a Montana resident, permit holder (within the Pryor Range) and very frequent visitor to the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range.
I do not support the current Proposed Action in the Fertility Control Modification (2.1 Proposed Action) for the following reasons:
1. Long-term herd sustainability should be a primary management goal for the Pryor Mountain wild horses. The 2009 HMAP has stated that maintaining representation of all bloodlines is a major objective. The 2011 fertility control plan and 2012 gather plan have been consistent with this and the other objectives of the Plan, such as maintaining a core breeding age population.
2. By exposing fillies to PZP for four consecutive years there is an increased risk of sterility in this potential core breeding age group. (example would be Aurora, # 20036, who was primed as a yearling, vaccines in 2009 and has never foaled).
3. Allowing each mare to have only one descendant runs the risk of loss of important bloodlines and may greatly effect the genetics of this herd. This herd has a unique history and bloodlines, and preserving those bloodlines is very important. The Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range is not the Assateague Island National Seashore, and so the fertility control plan developed there should not be assumed to be appropriate here.
4. I feel that the current fertility plan is beginning to show favorable results. Last year (2012) there were 25 foals born and this year (to date) only 15 (13 surviving). I would
like to see this current program remain in place. I would rather see small removals (of 10 or less) then to have a too aggressive fertility program that may greatly effect this herd.
5. One of the recent publications by an advocacy group, suggested there is no market for the adoption of Pryor Horses, and that was their reason for an increase in the PZP program. I disagree with that and realize that adoption should be a separate issue that should be addressed separately, not making it the reason to increase the current fertility plan. The PMWMC and I have discussed several ways that may help with a successful adoption and we plan to work together in the future to make that happen.
Thank you for considering my comment.
Sincerely,
Sandra P. Elmore
Wild In The Pryors
Mercuria
I ask you to please submit a comment against any changes to the program at this time.
You can send your comments to:
Jim Sparks, Field Manager BLM Billings Field Office 5001 Southgate Drive Billings, MT 59101
Or email to make sure it gets there:
blm_mt_wildhorse@blm.gov
Thank you.
Sandy
2009 Memorandum on PZP fertility control trials
Secretary Ken Salazar Public Domainhttp://www.doi.gov/images/SecySalazarOfficialPortrait.jpg
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
March 12, 2009
In Reply Refer To:
4710 (260) P
EMS TRANSMISSION 03/17/2009
Instruction Memorandum No. 2009-090
Expires: 09/30/2010
To: All Field Officials (except Alaska)
From: Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning
Subject: Population-Level Fertility Control Field Trials: Herd Management Area (HMA) Selection, Vaccine Application, Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
Program Area: Wild Horse and Burro Program
Purpose: The purpose of this Instruction Memorandum is to establish guidance for population-level fertility control field research trials. The primary objective of these trials is to evaluate the effects of a single year or 22-month Porcine Zona Pellucida (PZP) immunocontraceptive vaccine treatment on wild horse population growth rates while expanding the use of these tools in the field.
Policy/Action: This policy establishes guidelines for selecting HMAs for population-level fertility control treatment, vaccine application, and post-treatment monitoring and reporting. It is the policy of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to apply fertility control as a component of all gathers unless there is a compelling management reason not to do so.
HMA Selection
Managers are directed to explore options for fertility control trials in all HMAs or complexes when they are scheduled for gathers. Further, an alternative outlining implementation of a fertility control treatment under a population-level research trial shall be analyzed in all gather plan environmental assessments (EA’s). Attachment 1 contains the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the implementation of the single-year and 22-month PZP agents, which should be referenced in the EA.
Fertility control should not be used in a manner that would threaten the health of individual animals or the long-term viability of any herd. In order to address the latter requirement, managers must evaluate the potential effects of fertility control on herd growth rates through use of the Jenkins Population Model (WinEquus). Fertility control application should achieve a substantial treatment effect while maintaining some long-term population growth to mitigate the effects of potential environmental catastrophes.
Fertility control will have the greatest beneficial impact where:
- Annual herd growth rates are typically greater than 5%.
- Post-gather herd size is estimated to be greater than 50 animals.
- Treatment of at least 50% of all breeding-age mares within the herd is possible using either application in conjunction with gathers or remote delivery (darting). A maximum of 90% of all mares should be treated and our goal should be to achieve as close as to this percentage as possible in order to maximize treatment effects.
Fertility control should not be dismissed as a potential management action even if the above conditions are not met. Regardless of primary capture method (helicopter drive-trapping or bait/water trapping), managers should strive to gather horses in sufficient numbers to achieve the goals of the management action, such as selective removal and fertility control treatment. After decisions are made to apply fertility control, historical herd information, remote darting success (if employed) and post-gather herd demographic data must be reported to the National Program Office (NPO). See the Reporting Requirements section on page four.
Vaccine Application and Animal Identification at Gather Sites Using the 22-Month Vaccine
Once an HMA has been selected as a population-level field trial site, the NPO will designate a trained applicator to administer the vaccine during the scheduled gather. The applicator will be responsible for securing the necessary vaccine from the NPO, transporting all application materials and freeze-marking equipment to the gather site, administering the treatment, and filing a treatment report with the NPO. See Attachment 1 for SOP for Population-level Fertility Control Treatments.
All treated mares will be freeze-marked with two 3.5-inch letters on the left hip for treatment tracking purposes. The only exception to this requirement is when each treated mare can be clearly and specifically identified through photographs. The treatment letters will be assigned and provided by the NPO after the gather and fertility control application is approved by the authorized officer. A different first letter is assigned for each fiscal year starting with fiscal year 2004 and the letter “A.” The second letter of the freeze-mark is specific to the application.
Each BLM State Office (SO) is responsible for coordinating with the State Brand Inspector on the use of the identified two-letter freeze-mark. Based on this coordination, possible alternatives or additions to this marking policy are listed below:
- Use of the adult or foal size angle-numeric BLM freezemark on the neck while recording each treatment product and date with the individual horse’s freezemark number.
- Registration of the BLM fertility control hip mark.
- Use of a registered brand furnished by the State.
- Use of the same hip freeze-mark for all fertility control treatments within that State’s jurisdiction plus an additional freeze-mark on the neck to differentiate between treatments within the State.
- Use of the NPO assigned freeze-mark plus additional freeze-mark on the neck to differentiate between treatments within the State.
As an example, the Nevada State Brand Inspector requires that an “F” freeze-mark be applied to the left neck along with the two-letter hip mark assigned by NPO.
Regardless of how the mares are marked, the marks must be identified in the fertility control treatment report in order to track when the mares were treated and the treatment protocol used.
Mares may be considered for re-treatment during subsequent gathers. All re-treatments will consist of the multi-year vaccine unless specifically approved by the NPO. Any re-treated mares must be re-marked or clearly identifiable for future information.
Vaccine Application and Animal Identification Using Remote Delivery (Darting)
Remote delivery of the one year vaccine by a trained darter/applicator will be considered and approved only when (1) application of the current 22-month PZP agent is not feasible because a gather will not be conducted, and (2) the targeted animals can be clearly and specifically identified on an on-going basis through photographs and/or markings. No animals should be darted that cannot be clearly and positively identified later as a treated animal. To increase the success rate of the darting and to insure proper placement of the vaccine, darting should occur along travel corridors or at water sources. If necessary, bait stations using hay or salt may be utilized to draw the horses into specific areas for treatment. The applicator will maintain records containing the basic information on the color and markings of the mare darted and her photographs, darting location, and whether the used darts were recovered from the field. See Appendix 1 for SOP for Population-Level Fertility Control Treatments.
Post-treatment Monitoring
At a minimum, the standard data collected on each treated herd will include one aerial population survey prior to any subsequent gather. This flight will generally occur 3 to 4 years after the fertility control treatment and will be conducted as a routine pre-gather inventory funded by the Field Office (FO). The flight should be timed to assure that the majority of foaling is completed, which for most herds will require that flights be scheduled after August 1st. In addition to pre-gather population data (herd size), information on past removals, sex ratio, and age structure (capture data) will be submitted to the NPO after the first post-treatment gather.
The following standard data will be collected during all post-treatment population surveys:
- Total number of adult (yearling and older) horses observed.
- Total number of foals observed.
These data are to be recorded on the Aerial Survey Report form (Attachment 4). In planning post-treatment population surveys, the new population estimation techniques being developed by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are strongly recommended. In general, however, it is not necessary that anyone try to identify treated and untreated mares and specifically which mares have foaled during aerial surveys.
To obtain more specific information on vaccine efficacy, some HMAs may be selected for intensive monitoring beginning the first year after treatment and ending with the first gather that follows treatment. These surveys should be completed annually within the same month for consistency of the data. Selection will be based on the proportion of treated mares in the herd, degree of success with vaccine application, degree to which HMA selection criteria are met, and opportunities for good quality data collection. This determination will be made by the WH&B Research Advisory Team and the NPO in consultation with the appropriate Field Office (FO) and State Office (SO). HMAs selected for intensive monitoring will be identified in that specific State’s Annual Work Plan. Washington Office 260 (WO260) will provide funding for the annual surveys in those HMAs selected for intensive monitoring.
Field Office personnel may conduct more intensive on-the-ground field monitoring of these herds as time and budget allow. These data should be limited to: 1) the annual number of marked and unmarked mares with and without foals and 2) foaling seasonality. These data, generated for FO use, should be submitted to the NPO to supplement research by the USGS.
Reporting Requirements
1) When an HMA is selected for fertility control treatment, the HMA manager will initiate and complete the appropriate sections of the Gather, Removal, and Treatment Summary Report (Attachment 2) and submit the report to the NPO. At the conclusion of the gather and treatment, the HMA manager will complete the remainder of the Gather, Removal, and Treatment Summary Report and submit it to the NPO within 30 days. The NPO will file and maintain these reports, with a copy sent to the National WH&B Research Coordinator.
2) Following treatment, the fertility control applicator will complete a PZP Application Report and PZP Application Data Sheet (Attachments 3 & 4) and submit it to the NPO that summarizes the treatment. The NPO will maintain this information and provide copies of the reports to appropriate FOs and USGS.
3) Managers are required to send post-treatment monitoring data (Aerial Survey Report, Attachment 5) to the NPO within 30 days of completing each aerial survey. Any additional on-the-ground monitoring data should be sent to the NPO on an annual basis by December 31st.
4) During the next post-treatment gather (generally 4 to 6 years after treatment), the manager will complete a new Gather, Removal, and Treatment Summary Report with pertinent information and submit the report to the NPO. Completion of this report will fulfill the requirements for monitoring and reporting for each population-level study. A possible exception would be if mares are treated (or re-treated) and the HMA is retained as a population-level study herd.
The USGS will analyze all standard data collected. The results of these analyses along with other research efforts will help determine the future use of PZP fertility control for management of wild horse herds by the BLM.
Timeframe: This Instruction Memorandum is effective upon issuance.
Budget Impact: Implementation of this policy will achieve cost savings by reducing the numbers of excess animals removed from the range and minimizing the numbers of less adoptable animals removed. The costs to administer the one-year PZP agent include the labor and equipment costs for the applicator and assistant of roughly $4,000/month and the treatment cost of approximately $25 per animal. The costs to administer the 22-month PZP agent include the capture cost of about $1,000 per animal treated (under normal sex ratios it requires two horses, one stud and one mare, to be captured for each mare treated) and the PZP vaccine is approximately $250 per animal. The budgetary savings for each foal not born due to fertility control is about $500 for capture, $1,100 for adoption prep and short-term holding, $500-1,000 for adoption costs, and approximately $475 per year for long-term holding of animals removed but not adopted. For each animal that would have been maintained at long term holding for the remainder of its life after capture, the total cost savings is about $13,000. Any additional FO-level monitoring will be accomplished while conducting other routine field activities at no additional cost.
Population-level studies will help to further evaluate the effectiveness of fertility control in wild horse herds. Recent research results showed that application of the current 22-month PZP contraceptive appears capable of reducing operating costs for managing wild horse populations. Application of a 3-4 year contraceptive, when developed, tested, and available, may be capable of reducing operating costs by even more (Bartholow, 2004).
Background: The one-year PZP vaccine has been used with success on the Pryor Mountain and the Little Book Cliffs Wild Horse Ranges. The 22-month PZP vaccine has been administered to 1,808 wild horse mares in 47 HMAs since fiscal year 2004. This formulation has been shown to provide infertility potentially through the third year post-treatment as determined by a trial conducted at the Clan Alpine HMA in 1999. The intent of the ongoing population-level fertility control trials is to determine if the rate of population growth in wild horse herds can be reduced through the use of the currently available 22-month time-release PZP vaccine, applied within a 3-4 year gather and treatment cycle. Monitoring data collected over the next few years are essential to determine the effectiveness of the vaccine when applied on a broad scale as well as its potential for management use.
PZP is classified as an Investigational New Animal Drug and some level of monitoring will continue to be required until such time as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) either reclassify the vaccine or provide some other form of relief.
Manual/Handbook Sections Affected: The monitoring requirements do not change or affect any manual or handbook.
Coordination: The requirements outlined in this policy have been evaluated by the National Wild Horse and Burro Research Advisory Team, coordinated with the National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board, and reviewed by Field Specialists.
Contact: Questions concerning this policy should be directed to Alan Shepherd, WH&B Research Coordinator at the Wyoming State Office in Cheyenne, Wyoming at (307) 775-6097.
Reference: Bartholow, J.M. 2004. An economic analysis of alternative fertility control and associated management techniques for three BLM wild horse herds. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Geological Survey. Open-File Report 2004-1199. 33 p.
Signed by: Authenticated by:
Edwin L. Roberson Robert M. Williams
Assistant Director Division of IRM Governance,WO-560
Renewable Resources and Planning
5 Attachments
BLM Rock Springs and Rawlings schedule public meetings and extend scoping on wild horse management
| August 27, 2013 The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will host public scoping meetings from 4-7 p.m. Sept. 11 at the Rock Springs Field Office, 280 Highway 191 N., Rock Springs, Wyo.; and Sept. 12 at the Rawlins Field Office, 1300 N. Third St., Rawlins, Wyo., to address wild horse and burro management for the Rock Springs and Rawlins Resource Management Plans (RMPs). The scoping period for the RMP revisions will also be extended to Sept. 27 to allow adequate time for public comment. The scoping meetings will provide an opportunity for the public and interested parties to ask questions one-on-one with BLM specialists, view maps and posters detailing the RMP revision process, and provide written comments. The BLM is seeking public input in analyzing the environmental impacts of implementing the April 3 consent decree governing wild horse management in the checkerboard pattern of mixed public, private, and state land ownership in southern Wyoming. Under the consent decree, the BLM agrees to remove all wild horses from the Rock Springs Grazing Association’s (RSGA) private lands. RSGA owns or leases more than 48 percent of the private land in four herd management areas (HMAs) in the checkerboard within the boundaries of the Rawlins and Rock Springs field offices. Wild horse management, including HMA boundaries which encompass RSGA lands and appropriate management levels (AMLs), will be reviewed and reanalyzed. Written comments will be accepted until Sept. 27. Comments may be emailed to BLM_WY_RockSpringsRMP@blm.gov (please include “Wild Horse Scoping” in the subject line), faxed to (307) 352-0329, or mailed to the Bureau of Land Management, Rock Springs Field Office, Wild Horse Scoping, 280 Highway 191 N., Rock Springs, WY 82901. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the individuals listed below during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the below individuals. You will receive a reply during normal business hours. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment – including your personal identifying information – may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. For further information, please contact Jay D’Ewart at (307) 352-0331, or William West at (307) 352-0259. Note to editor: A link to the planning documents can be found at www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/programs/Planning/rmps/RockSprings.html. |
||
| The BLM manages more than 245 million acres of public land, the most of any Federal agency. This land, known as the National System of Public Lands, is primarily located in 12 Western states, including Alaska. The BLM also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation. The BLM’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. In Fiscal Year 2012, activities on public lands generated $4.6 billion in revenue, much of which was shared with the States where the activities occurred. In addition, public lands contributed more than $112 billion to the U.S. economy and helped support more than 500,000 jobs. | ||
| –BLM–Rock Springs Field Office 280 Highway 191 N. Rock Springs, WY 82901 |
In the wild they seek #Shade4Mustangs and burros
Info about Native American horses selling at NV livestock auction Sat
Just called the livestock exchange, guy said they just finished counting all the horses and his numbers are approximate:
Viewing between 8-10 Saturday morning on site
selling by the head or lot, not by the pound
Approx 35 mares + babies together, will be sold singly not as a lot
Approx 40 mares in several lots (14, 17, 19)
25-30 mares no babies singly
25-30 geldings singly
Approx 75 big “old” studs to be sold in several lots
Approx 20-30 yearlings and weaned foals sold singly
All horses have brands except a few and except some babies
Auction starts at 11:00
Payment via cash, Visa or MasterCard only
Nevada tax = 7.6%
The lots will be sold at the pens – those horses will not be brought through the arena, everyone will walk to the pens and bid there
If we’re bidding, we need to register
27 owners represented in these 500 horses
I just added those numbers and it only comes to 275, so not sure about the other 225 horses that would make a total of 500 but at least we get the idea
Temporary Restraining Order Granted
TRO granted only for unbranded horses. All others go through sale. Please help buy them.
|
ORDER Plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (dkt no. 7) is hereby GRANTED pending a hearing on the Motion. Plaintiffs Motion to Expedite (dkt. no. 8) is also GRANTED. Defendants shall file their response by August 20, 2013. The Motion is scheduled for hearing on August 21, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. In the meantime, Defendants are temporarily enjoined, pending the August 21, 2013, hearing, from permitting the sale of all unbranded horses removed as a result of the August 11-13 gather conducted pursuant to the Agreement at the August 17, 2013, scheduled auction. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on August 16, 2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF – KER)
|
AWHPC has filed for a TRO and it was granted thankfully.
Why end natural selection in the Pryors?
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/mt/main_story.Par.31432.File.dat/TopStoryHorse.pdf
Should humans run a wild horse breeding program or does nature know best?
From: (http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/mt/main_story.Par.31432.File.dat/TopStoryHorse.pdf) The BLM welcomed a new partner this spring. The adept volunteer efforts of the Cloud Foundation’s Effie Orser, Lauryn Wachs, and Ginger Kathrens contributed to the successful completion of this year’s fertility treatments in record time. The trio worked in concert with two BLM employees, Ryan Brad- shaw and Jerad Werning, who were darting wild horses elsewhere on the Range.
Statement from Protect Mustangs
We are against the Cloud Foundation and BLM partnership for extreme PZP in the Pryors for the following reasons:
1.) It ruins natural selection.
2.) According to the National Academy of Sciences there is no evidence of overpopulation.
3.) Reserve design is the healthy choice for management.
4.) Risks of sterility could ruin the herd’s genetic viability.
5.) Unnatural and increased stress on wild mares from wild stallions continuously trying to breed them month after month, year after year, until they are allowed by mankind to have one foal.
6.) Man made fertility control drugs endanger the wild herds’ ability to adapt through reproduction to environmental stresses.
7.) The “Restricted Use Pesticide” known as PZP is not allowed on domestic horses–surely for safety concerns and therefore should not be allowed on native wild horses who have been misclassified as “pests” by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Natural selection has allowed native wild horses to evolve and survive for more than a million years. We believe it is unethical for a government agency and a nonprofit organization to go against natural evolution and manipulate breeding through excessive roundups and drugs approved for use as “restricted use pesticides”.
Now the public is witnessing the final phase of the Salazar Plan announced in 2009 (managing wild horses to extinction) using an EPA fast-tracked “Restricted Use Pesticide” called Porcine zona pellucida–a form of zona pellucida extracted from the ovaries of pigs.
And speaking of pigs, where are the pigs’ ovaries coming from? How were the pig’s ovaries extracted?
The Pryor Mountain Herd is already one of the two herds designated with “Treasured” status–that means they are protected and will never disappear. No need to sell out to “restricted use pesticides” for “pest” control!
“We are proud to be working with the BLM, and we hope our partnership with them will continue and may set an example for the management of other wild herds throughout the West,” said Ginger Kathens, Executive Director of The Cloud Foundation in the BLM’s top story released on August 12, 2013.
What happened to The Cloud Foundation fighting for America’s wild horses’ right to live their natural lives in freedom?
“Why is Ginger Kathrens now supporting the extreme use of PZP when a couple of years ago she appeared to be against using the drug, against ruining natural selection and against creating zoo-like settings on mountaintops?” asks Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs. “We want a moratorium on roundups and call for immediate population studies before blasting wild horses with fertility control and sterilization.”
Links of interest:
Ginger Kathrens’ paper PZP-22… Do Unintended Side-Effects Outweigh Benefits? http://protectmustangs.org/?p=3270
Cloud Foundation Partnership with BLM to dart the Pryor herd with the “Restricted Use Pesticide” known as PZP to “control” fertility http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/mt/main_story.Par.31432.File.dat/TopStoryHorse.pdf
Ecologist Craig Downer speaks out against using PZP in the Pryors http://protectmustangs.org/?p=4178
Salazar presents ambitious plan to manage wild horses, Washington Post: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-10-08/news/36823356_1_wild-horses-burros-wild-herd
Ken Salazar’s wild horse plan fuels accusations that he’s in the pocket of ranchers, Huff Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/17/ken-salazars-wild-horse-p_n_324799.html
BLM announces The Salazar Plan (press release) http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/newsroom/2009/october/salazar_seeks_congressional.html