Bogus Science and Profiteering Stampeding Their Way into Wild Horse Country

Posted on June 7, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

Nevada mustang © Carl Mrozek

A Review of Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program: A Way Forward (2013)

by Jaime Jackson, AANHCP Executive Director

I’ve reviewed the entire 300+ page National Academy of Sciences report—clearly a major undertaking by all the scientists involved and a bit of a “heavy” read—including its academic findings and recommendations (“A Way Forward”) which are, in the end, woefully predictable. Thinking about it, however, the scientists who created the report really had no choice, given the limits of the Wild, Free-roaming and Burro Act itself, if we are to accept that, but to work within its boundaries and the conundrum set upon them by that law’s specious political and land management premise and somehow respond to the task put upon them by the BLM. Clearer and more honest minds might have said, “I want no part of such a nasty, skewed project.” I also gleaned the biographies of each scientist to see what kind of understanding they would bring to the table regarding horse care based on their education and training, and if they seem like “clear minded” thinkers who could think outside the box in the best interest of any horse. On that note alone, wild horses are in trouble.

Because the “limits” put upon the NAS committee by the wild horse law are what they are, and because these are basically mainstream scientists drawn out of academia, it is entirely logical that they would recommend regulating wild horse and burro populations, in their words, “with science”. But what kind of science, one might ask? Well, the fact is, it’s the same brand of science, and scien- tific minds in today’s academia, that has failed the domesticated horse. We’re talking about scientists who serve the special interests of government and its lobbyists, the agricultural and pharmaceutical industries, and so forth, that have given us drugs and feeds and management practices that cause laminitis and other metabolic breakdowns of the horse. Indeed, it is all profitable for the very community that has created this “science based” disaster for horses. I’m not just spewing words here without foundation, horses truly suffer for it, and it is this bad science and corresponding harmful equine management practices that have given birth to and fueled the internationally burgeoning NHC movement. That is a fact—and it is a fact also that these scientists, and the special interests that fund them, refuse to acknowledge NHC because what we do and advocate for gets directly to the bottom of ethics and profiteering and inbred academic close-mindedness.

The authors of this NAS report have very skillfully woven together what is genuinely good sci- ence with the bad, while ignoring other good science altogether—all to the end of supporting the bogus proposition that their brand of “science” favors a lasting solution for wild horse management. If one reads their report carefully, however, one can sense the palpable excitement and impatience behind their drug-based recommendations. For example, they urge the BLM to step up an accurate numbers count in the HMAs (which, arguably, given that agency’s past, can never be trusted) because, they suggest, the quantities of PZP and other pharmaceutical agents needed to cleanse wild horse country will surely be vastly greater than what was used in their scientifically con- taminated control study done to the Assateague ponies of the U.S. east coast (cited in their re- port). Assateague was not good science, anymore than what has happened to those horses long before the government’s study. It catered to the drug industry and the same eugenics science that the U.S. and British governments sanctioned and used against people during the greater part of the 20th century (up to the 1960s and 70s), and that was astutely “borrowed” from by Nazi Germany for its extermination campaigns to “rid the world of undesirables”.

Just as tactfully, and just as predictably, the NAS authors stated that predation behavior was not viable, ignoring Drs. Turner and Morrow’s mountain lion predations studies referenced in my books, The Natural Horse and Paddock Paradise, and which proved the viability of natural predation on wild horse herds. Of course, the reason that natural mountain lion and wolf predation won’t work, and which the NAS report fails to explain, is because BLM management practices have provided for their extermination and/or removal under welfare ranching pressure that deflects the truth of what’s happening within their grandfathered land leases born of the Taylor Grazing Act and the BLM’s inception.

I could easily go on, and on, and on, nit picking the massive tangled NAS report, but would just be wasting my time and yours with the report’s self-serving “word salad”. The fact is, there is no genuine solution in their report that respects the natural integrity of America’s wild, free- roaming horses. And there is no debating the authors of the report either, for they are completely sold out to the very special interests who have never seen value in our wild horses. In fact, it is the science community that has recently aided and abetted the government in reclassifying wild horses legally as “pests” so that the pesticide PZP can be used on them for birth control purposes. You see, the NAS report is no surprise, as its convoluted “commandments” have been systematically orchestrated and colluded with by just about everyone in sight, including—and I am sad to say—nearly every purported “wild horse protection” group and sanctuary in the United States. Many of these groups stand to “gain” from this collusion, including the HSUS that co-owns patent rights to PZP.

Tax payers can expect to pay more, not less, as they watch their wild horse herds deteriorate genetically under the government’s Nazification of the HMAs through racism-based eugenics. This is because there is profit motive at its foundation. In fact, the report cautions that “public confidence” and trust will be an important part of the “master solution”. Inundating tax payers with scientific “word salad” that few can understand, is understood. Clearly, the public does not understand the underlying issues, except what they hear in the news. From that vantage point, this does not bode well for our wild horses.

What is needed is a new vision and a new law for genuine wild horse preservation. The current law is bankrupt and offers no real protection, let alone preservation. Science, industry and the big government have joined claws and are at war with Natural Selection, because they are losing—and they know it. And, it is for this reason, that Science is now being called upon to step up the delusion that the war on nature can and will be won. Like the war on cancer, no such victory is forthcoming. But because the war is profit driven, the war is welcome. Read the NAS report with a critical eye, and you will see this. In the end, HMAs will become zoos with GMO wild horses. Like those we see in the wild horse protectionist’s “sanctuaries”: sad, pathetic parodies of real wild horses. Is this what the public envisioned when it stood behind the original wild horse protection law? Of course not. but, here today, government and science and industry (and its camp following ersatz wild horse protectionists begging for crumbs), all hand in hand, are going to exploit wild horses and unwitting taxpayers for what they can—until, at long last, nature has proven them wrong, and the deceptive game is exposed for all to see. The Assateague model, which they will cite and hold up, is a broken one. But they are counting on an uninformed public to buy into it. Those of us in the NHC movement know better and can refute it with facts by simply looking at the hooves of those horses, if not the non-adaptative environment they are squeezed into be- cause of an historical fluke. Looking through the bios of the NAS committee members, I seriously doubt that any of them would have a clue of what I’m talking about.

The Obama Administration, as much of the voting public on both sides of the aisle have come to realize, is a compromised, “sold out to big industry” travesty that is going to stand be- hind the eugenics science and land grab scheme fully intended to bilk the taxpayer and pad the pockets of profiteers who, quite frankly, don’t give a damn about wild horses. That includes Sally Jewell, Obama’s hand-picked clone of Ken Salazar to head the Department of the Interior (BLM’s overseer), who is no friend of the wild horse or any horse. She came right out of big banking and the oil industry. Check out her bio on her DOI government website. She will go right along with “big science” because that is where the money is and because, the fact is (and it is not rocket science to figure it out), it will lead to the decimation of wild horse herds. James Kleinert’s film “Wild Horses and Renegades” draws a direct line between Jewell, “wild horse pests” and their extermination, and the land grab now going on in BLM country by big industries such as BP and backed by the Obama Administration.

Let me put it in simple terms — it’s just a matter of time before they’re shoeing wild horses in the HMAs! If you don’t want that, support the AANHCP’s vision for genuine, lasting wild horse protection and taxpayer relief. See it here: http://www.aanhcp.net/index.php? option=com_content&view=article&id=218&Itemid=85

NAS report: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php? booksearch=1&term=1&record_id=13511&Search+This+Book.x=27&Search+This+Book. y=15

NAS committee members: http://dels.nap.edu/Committee/committee-membership/DELS-BANR-10-05

Jamie Jackson’s piece in PDF: PM Jamie Jackson Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program

Critique of BLM’s Broken Wild Horse & Burro Program

Posted on June 7, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

by Carl Mrozek, filmmaker: “Saving Ass in America” A documentary about the horrendous eradication of wild burros. (release date: December 7th, 2013)

To their credit, the NAS critique of BLM totally discredits the BLM’s unscientific management methodology, particularly re: gauging population levels. Unfortunately, they prescribe a primarily pharmaceutical remedy for a problem that hasn’t been established yet, i.e. ‘over-population’. How can you assert that there is overpopulation of wild horses and/or burros when you:

1. Don’t know what the population of horses or burros currently is, in a given HMA

2. Have no data-driven basis for gauging how many horses or burros a particular HMA can support. In practice BLM treats all habitats as being pretty much the same, and as resource poor, by requiring 1000+ acres/ horse or burro.

The NAS report also buys into BLM’s myth that wild horse & burro populations are increasing at a fairly constant rate of 15-20%/ year regardless of some radical differences in range quality between one HMA and another….

as well as radical differences in the structure, health and genetic viability of one herd vs. the next.

3. Fail to address the impacts of cattle and sheep upon rangelands, and upon wild horse reproductive success and recruitment rates

What I most appreciate about the NAS report is that they confirm key criticisms made by advocates, and ignored by the BLM, for a very long time including:

1. the BLM’s population numbers are speculative at best, and fictitious at worst !

2. the roundups are a counter-productive and inhumane solution to a problem (overpopulation) which may or may not exist in a given locale, at a given time.

3. the frequent and aggressive regime of roundups actually stimulates increased reproduction, migration and over-population, at -least where enough equines survive the roundups or can migrate from adjacent herd areas. This creates a vicious cycle wherein aggressive roundups create a need for more frequent and aggressive roundups.

Glaring omissions in the NAS report include:

1. The question of what constitutes “fair and balanced” apportionment of forage and water between horses and livestock on a given HMA, -which is critical to ascertaining whether the range is being overgrazed, how much, and by what animals. Without exception, livestock are allocated the lion’s share of available forage, typically upwards of 80%, -where data is even available.

2. what to do with the 37-50,000 horses and burros now languishing in long and short term holding. including what proportion should be returned to their rightful range, on what schedule…. etc. Until this ‘overpopulation problem’ is addressed, there will continue to be a wild horse ‘population crisis’ and a costly one at that.

3. How to induce an agency accustomed to being regarded by the world at large as the default authority on public rangeland capacity and on wild horse and burro population levels residing on them, to begin managing both on the basis of actual, current data rather than on data, or fudged numbers, of varying age and veracity and hence with questionable credibility.

Overall, though, the NAS panel indicted a sadly flawed, broken program in desperate need of a total makeover, starting with a basic need for fresh data and a scientific approach vs. the “Trust us because we’re the authorities on public lands and the wild equines that live there” which has prevailed for 40+ years that BLM has been tasked with managing this priceless heritage for all of US.

Nevada mustang © Carl Mrozek

Watch for CBS Sunday Morning’s “Moment of Nature” -featuring mustangs that Carl shot in the NV PineNuts, this Sunday at the end of the show!

National Academy of Science Review to be released Wed

Posted on June 4, 2013 by Protect Mustangs


Project Title:	A Review of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Wild Horse and Burro (WH&B) Management Program
PIN:	DELS-BANR-10-05
Major Unit:	Division on Earth and Life Studies
Sub Unit:	Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources
RSO:	Laney, Kara N.
Subject/Focus Area:	Agriculture; Biology and Life Sciences; Environment and Environmental Studies

Project Scope
At the request of the Bureau of Land Management, the National Research Council (NRC) will conduct an independent, technical evaluation of the science, methodology, and technical decision-making approaches of the WH&B Program. In evaluating the program, the study will build on findings of three prior reports prepared by the NRC in 1980, 1982, and 1991 and summarize additional, relevant research completed since the three earlier reports were prepared. Relying on information about the program provided by BLM and on field data collected by BLM and others, the analysis will address the following key scientific challenges and questions:1. Estimates of the WH&B populations: Given available information and methods, how accurately can WH&B populations on BLM land designed for WH&B use be estimated? What are the best methods to estimate WH&B herd numbers and what is the margin of error in those methods? Are there better techniques than the BLM currently uses to estimate population numbers? For example, could genetics or remote sensing using unmanned aircraft be used to estimate WH&B population size and distribution? 2. Population Modeling: Evaluate the strengths and limitations of models for predicting impacts on wild horse populations given various stochastic factors and management alternatives. What types of decisions are most appropriately supported using the WinEquus model? Are there additional models the BLM should consider for future uses? 3. Genetic diversity in WH&B herds: What does information available on WH&B herds’ genetic diversity indicate about long-term herd health, from a biological and genetic perspective? Is there an optimal level of genetic diversity within a herd to manage for? What management actions can be undertaken to achieve an optimal level of genetic diversity if it is too low? 4. Annual rates of WH&B population growth: Evaluate estimates of the annual rates of increase in WH&B herds, including factors affecting the accuracy of and uncertainty related to the estimates. Is there compensatory reproduction as a result of population-size control (e.g., fertility control or removal from herd management areas)? Would WH&B populations self-limit if they were not controlled, and if so, what indicators (rangeland condition, animal condition, health, etc.) would be present at the point of self-limitation? 5. Predator impact on WH&B population growth: Evaluate information relative to the abundance of predators and their impact on WH&B populations. Although predator management is the responsibility of the USFWS or State wildlife agencies and given the constraints in existing federal law, is there evidence that predators alone could effectively control WH&B population size on BLM land designed for WH&B use? 6. Population control: What scientific factors should be considered when making population control decisions (roundups, fertility control, sterilization of either males or females, sex ratio adjustments to favor males and other population control measures) relative to the effectiveness of control approach, herd health, genetic diversity, social behavior, and animal well-being? 7. Fertility control: Evaluate information related to the effectiveness of fertility control methods to prevent pregnancies and reduce herd populations. 8. Managing a portion of a population as non-reproducing: What scientific and technical factors should the BLM consider when managing for WH&B herds with reproducing and non-reproducing animals (i.e., a portion of the population is a breeding population and the remainder is non-reproducing males or females)? When managing a herd with reproducing and non-reproducing animals, which options should be considered: geldings, vasectomized males, overectomized mares, or other interventions)? Is there credible evidence to indicate that geldings or vasectomized stallions in a herd would be effective in decreasing annual population growth rates, or are there other methods the BLM should consider for managing stallions in a herd that would be effective in tangibly suppressing population growth? 9. AML Establishment or Adjustment: Evaluate the BLM’s approach to establishing or adjusting Appropriate Management Levels (AML) as described in the 4700-1 Wild Horses and Burros Management Handbook. Based upon scientific and technical considerations, are there other approaches to establishing or adjusting AML the BLM should consider? How might BLM improve its ability to validate AML? 10. Societal Considerations: What are some options available to BLM to address the widely divergent and conflicting perspectives about WH&B management and to consider stakeholder concerns while using the best available science to protect land and animal health? 11. Additional Research Needs: Identify research needs and opportunities related to the topics listed above. What research should be the highest priority for BLM to fill information and data gaps, reduce uncertainty, and improve decision-making and management? The project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Interior. The start date of the project is June 2, 2011. A report is expected to be issued by the end of the project in approximately 24 months. Statement of task updated March 14, 2012. FOr more information go to: http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/projectview.aspx?key=49392

Protect Mustangs™ spurs inquiry into dead horses at Palomino Valley

Posted on April 17, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

(Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

On Friday April 12, Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs™, asked a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) employee a simple facility question. She wanted to know the mortality rate of captured wild horses at the Palomino Valley facility since January 1, 2013.

Rather than provide an easy transparent answer, the employee dismissed her request and told Novak to contact the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Office.

Novak copied many advocates and members of the media on her second and third request for mortality rate information. She is concerned about the obvious lack of transparency in the BLM’s Wild Horse and Burro Program.

The wild horse and burro advocate community now wants to know how many have died at the facility since the beginning of the year. Several advocates have sent the BLM employee emails as a result of his refusal to share basic facility information.

Esteemed advocates and members of the public have contacted their elected officials to request government transparency and an answer to Novak’s question.

Members of the greater public are wondering why the BLM is hiding the mortality rate. The big questions are spreading on social media: “What is the BLM hiding? How many died at Palomino Valley since January 1, 2013?”

Below is Novak’s third request:

April 17, 2013

Dear Jeb,

Kindly provide a written response to my simple question from April 12th. You will find the whole email stream on our website as well as below:

How many horses died at the facility since Jan 1, 2013?

Thank you for your prompt assistance.

Sincerely,

Anne Novak

CC list includes Stacy Peters, Palomino Valley employee and others

BC list undisclosed

Anne Novak

Executive Director

Protect Mustangs™

San Francisco Bay Area

Tel./Text: 415.531.8454

Read about native wild horses: http://protectmustangs.org/?page_id=562

Protect Mustangs™ on Facebook

Protect Mustangs™ on Twitter

Protect Mustangs™ on YouTube

Protect Mustangs™ in the News

Donate to help Protect Mustangs™

www.ProtectMustangs.org

Protect Mustangs™ is devoted to protecting native wild horses. Our mission is to educate the public about the native wild horse, protect and research American wild horses on the range and help those who have lost their freedom.

Read Animals Angels’ FOIA report revealing discrepancies in mortality records from January 1, 2010 to May 31, 2012: http://www.animalsangels.org/the-issues/horse-slaughter/foia-requests/497-blm-nevada-mortality-records-a-nevada-rendering-animals-angels-foia-request-reveals-discrepancies.html

Corruption of the 1971 W.H. & B. Act of must end

Posted on April 14, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

Cross-posted from http://prophoto7journal.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/corruption-of-the-w-h-b-act-of-1971-needs-to-end/

by Photographer and Journalist

Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971, and the corruption within, is discussed here. Indeed a noble Congressional situation and passed unanimously at the time. The spirit was a good-faith gesture, by Law, toward America’s Wild Horse Herds — But something happened, something terrible happened, and it involved corruption from the top down, and terms of “Acceptable Abuse” which changed everything:

Congressional findings and declaration of policy, and states clearly:

“Congress finds and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; that they contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people; and that these horses and burros are fast disappearing from the American scene. It is the policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, or death; and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.”

The Breaking Down of the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971

The initial “blast” of ingenuity and a caring spirit exists in the very opening of the W.H. & B. Act of 971. From then onward reality, the harsh mistress, enters into the realm of managing America’s Wild Horse Herds. This actual spirit of well written “Congressional Declaration” becomes nothing more than deception. Oddly, not by Congress, who had an honest concern toward America’s Wild Horse Herds, and correcting the blatant mistreatment of them within a protective context. No, this comes down to the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, and corruption combined with government dishonesty.

We have seen an absolute-reality take place, the disappearance over the years of the care and appropriate managing of America’s Wild Horse Herds. The Reality: Proper Management has been replaced with what is termed “Acceptable Abuse” which demonstrates beyond a doubt that the W.H.&B.P. Board of Consultants and the Bureau of Land Management are and always have been unqualified and corrupt; this is an absolute and quantitative reality directly related to their mismanagement or corrupt administration of America’s Wild Horse Herds. The Federal court cases alone demonstrate beyond a doubt this is reality, and at heavy cost to taxpayers, yet ignored and replaced by misinformation and outright lies to the public, cloaked in some type of odd reasoning with hopes the public will accept it! The Public has not!

The consultants on the board have a narrow margin of backgrounds. Their history of demonstrating no knowledgeable context of proper management of horses, other than a livestock mentality, becomes quite obvious within their decisions. This becomes significant, extremely devastating and on the road toward extinction of our wild horses, in their unqualified behavior to manage America’s Wild Horse Herds.

The absolute destruction of our Wild Horse Herds becomes more applicable, and fit to their purpose — all the while at a much higher cost to taxpayers. The actual No-Roundup / No Abuse management paradigm, basically leaving the wild horses on America’s Public Lands with a manage-to-enhance and safe-guard them, in reality saves taxpayers $Billions of dollars! But ignored, because in their minds it is only taxpayer money, and to hell with taxpayers!

This leads to erroneous and contemptible management by BLM; whereas, the W.H.& B. Act of 1971 becomes ignored to the point of being null and void. This leads to another harsh reality, contentiousness rather than preservation; management driven by animosity rather than a standard set for the protection of a vulnerable specifies; and a total waste of taxpayer money, with no proper or legitimate explanation toward expenditure. The W.H.&B. Act of 1971 simply becomes a deceptive-cloak to hide and obtain money, because in reality there exists no type of proper management or care of America’s Wild Horse Herds what so ever and in accord with the Act.

Vulnerable Species Leads to Extinction

We have learned many things over the years when it comes to extinction of our wildlife. Apparently, these same learned attributes remain ignored by those same people, who claim to be our nation’s Stewarts of our PublicLands and America’s Wildlife. Well documented lessons from the past, although ignored currently, still remain the key toward avoiding extinction of a species.

For example yes, there is a difference between a Wild Horse and a domesticated bred horse; Yes, there is a difference between the many species of wolves, and the domestic dogs of the world; It is this simple to understand.

1. Slow moving animals are no competition to man-made devises such as helicopters used in the wild horse herd roundups — i.e. no legitimate reasons are ever given to conform to the W.H. & B. Act of 1971 for legitimate roundups — the W.H. & B. Act is ignored in total;

2. Large animals are vulnerable to over-hunting as well as to government agencies convoluted lies and misinformation, which it has been shown in history, many times, leading to species extinction of many animals;

3. Altruism, or specifies that have come close to civilization, bonds established in regard to images or friendships, etc., have become detrimental to many species throughout history — i.e. wild horses, wolves, buffalo, Steller’s Sea Cow, the Passenger Pigeon, etc;

4. Vulnerability due to restricted habitat has been a major cause of wild life extinction throughout history, and is well documented — a lesson here to be not only learned but placed into management paradigms, especially when managing wild horses or wolves;

5. A related, and certainly obvious situation within this context, is the “Over-Specialization of Habitat” — and within this discussion cattle and the lies perpetrated by government agencies such as the BLM to enhance our Public Lands with cattle, oil, energy, mining, and other corporate circumstances, etc. . . and to hell with America’s natural ecological habitats and wildlife.

With this categorical explanation, which is well documented and referenced quite well, yet ignored, remains troublesome to the majority of Americans. The real-truth is any species that suffers from several of these factors can be quickly eliminated.

Conclusively

The fact is that ecological systems are vulnerable to many environmental situations. Our civilization intruding upon any of these systems becomes detrimental to the over all balance of many other ecological systems. Our civilization has a history of taking-over lands that once belonged to wildlife and vegetation, and those same elements of nature are now extinct, sadly!

Public Lands and Range Mangers do have access to wildlife that is beneficial to America’s Ecological systems. It can be attributable to a “language of protection” toward our environment (which includes Wild Horse Herds), if they are qualified to observe these situations. Most of them are not qualified, so good management is currently non-existent!

Listening and observing what our natural environment has to tell us is of significance, always. A point of discussion currently that is picking up momentum within the environmental community is the fact of how we identify the difference between a technical report generated by a political agenda — compared to a technical report that positively approaches resolution toward solving a serious environmental or wildlife issue of concern.

Yes, we can use the wild horse herds to let us know of ecological viability within many ecological systems, simply by their presence and health. Ironically, to many environmentalists, to include terrestrial and wildlife research biologists, government agencies and their consultants ignore this situation.

This is due to government employees lack of qualifications to manage our Public Lands; due to lack of ingenuity and competence to tell the truth; and, due to our present government employees lack of ethics and responsibility in safe-guarding taxpayer money.

When we have proper information, and the public needs this information to rationally confront our government presently, we have the tools to enhance and better America’s over all environment. If we ignore any of the historical facts, then combine them with arrogant management decisions, we will lose not only wildlife but significant and life giving habitat that keeps us all alive. Ultimately, the fact is we need better representation and the reality of more and better qualified people to manage our wildlife and environmental situations of this world.

The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 exemplifies this situation to the thousandth degree, and America’s Wild Horse Herds are paying the price — government agency’s bad behavior and bad decision making — when compared to actually following the very premise of what the Act outlines — and the ever present historical value of managing not only a diverse realm of ecological systems, but our wildlife as well.

____________________________

The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 Explained.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_and_Free-Roaming_Horses_and_Burros_Act_of_1971

Burea of Land Management version of the W.H.&B. Act of 1971http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/92-195.htm

The Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (without BLM reference and perspective)http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Wild+FreeRoaming+Horses+and+Burros+Act+of+1971.-a0141802026

Dry saline land: an investigation using ground-based geophysics, soil survey and spatial methods near Jamestown, South Australia. By R.W. Fitzpatrick, M. Thomas, P.J. Davies and B.G. Williams

Literature Review of Factors Influencing Public Perceptions of Water Reuse. By Murni Po, Juliane D. Kaercher and Blair E. Nancarrow – NOTE: This report has been updated in 2004 – click here for the updated version.

Development of a strategy for monitoring Australia’s natural resources: a discussion paper. By Mac Kirby, Neil McKenzie and Myriam Bormans

Quantifying and managing sources of sediments and nutrients in low-lying canelands. By Christian H. Roth, Fleur Visser, Robert Wasson, John Reghenzani and Ian Prosser

Use of APSIM to simulate water balances of dryland farming systems in south eastern Australia. By K. Verburg and W.J. Bond

Salt Transport in the Bremer Hills, SA. Interpretation of Spatial Datasets for Salt Distribution. Fourth report for NAP South Australian Salt Mapping and Management. Chris Smitt, Jim Cox and Phil Davies

Modelling catchment-scale nutrient generation. By Lachlan T.H. Newham and John J. Drewry

The Floodplain Risk Methodology (FRM): A suite of tools to rapidly assess at the regional scale the impacts of groundwater inflows and benefits of improved inundation on the floodplains of the lower River Murray. By Kate Holland, Ian Jolly, Ian Overton, Matt Miles, Linda Vears and Glen Walker

Ecological Risk Assessment for the Wetlands of the Lower Burdekin. By Bart M. Kellett, Terry Walshe and Keith L. Bristow

Ivanhoe Plain Aquifer Pumping Trial July 2003 – April 2005: Stage 1 OrdRiver Irrigation Area, Kununurra, Western Australia. By Anthony J. Smith, Duncan Palmer, Daniel W. Pollock and Ramsis B. Salama

Modelling periphyton biomass, photosynthesis and respiration in streams. By J. J. Christopher Rutherford and Susan M. Cuddy

Effects of salinity on stream ecosystems: improving models for macroinvertebrates. By J. Christopher Rutherford and Ben J. Kefford

A conceptual model of particulate trapping in riparian buffers. By Lachlan Newham, Kit Rutherford, and Barry Croke

Preliminary Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points Plan (HACCP) – Salisbury Stormwater to Drinking Water Aquifer Storage Transfer and Recovery (ASTR) Project. By Swierc, J., Page, D., Van Leeuwen, J. and Dillon, P.

A Bilingual User’s Guide for the Decision Support Tool for Managing Re-Vegetation and its Impact on Hydrology (ReVegIH) in the Coarse Sandy Hilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China. By Li, L.T., McVicar, T.R., Van Niel, T.G. Zhang, L., Li, R., Yang, Q.K., Zhang, X.P., Mu, X.M., Wen, Z.M., Liu, W.Z., Zhao, Y.A. and Liu, Z.H.

Mapping Perennial Vegetation Suitability and Identifying Priority Areas for Implementing the Re-Vegetation Program in the Coarse SandyHilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China. By Tim R. McVicar, ZhongMing Wen, Tom G. Van Niel, LingTao Li, QinKe Yang, Rui Li and Feng Jiao

Managing Change: Australian structural adjustment lessons for water. By J.C. McColl and M.D. Young

Estimates of average hydraulic drivers for sediment and nutrient fluxes in the GBR catchments from SedNet. By F.J. Cook and A. Henderson

Idealised analogue for predicting groundwater response times from sloping aquifers. By Glen R. Walker, Mat Gilfedder, and Warrick R. Dawes

Understanding spatial patterns of discharge in semi-arid regions using a recharge-discharge balance to determine vegetation health. By Rebecca Doble, Glen Walker and Craig Simmons

Modelling the fate of molinate in rice paddies of South Eastern Australia using RICEWQ. By Evan W.Christen, Wendy C. Quayle, Sang-Ok Chung and Ki Jung Park

Pesticide use in the 6th Creek sub-catchment, Mt. Lofty Ranges, S.A. and assessment of risk of off-site movement using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana

Pesticide use in the Ord River Irrigation Area, Western Australia, and Risk Assessment of Off-site Impact using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana

An Automated Remote Digital Image Collection System. By Aaron Hawdon and Rex Keen

Spatially Distributing 21 Years of Monthly Hydrometeorological Data in China: Spatio-Temporal Analysis of FAO-56 Crop Reference Evapotranspiration and Pan Evaporation in the Context of Climate Change. By Tim R. McVicar, LingTao Li, Tom G. Van Niel, Michael F. Hutchinson, XingMin Mu and ZhiHong Liu

Wild Horse Annie’s foundation in dire straights

Posted on February 21, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

Lantry, SD.

Near unprecedented drought in South Dakota has placed the historic International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros (ISPMB) in an emergency situation. There has been virtually no snow, there is virtually no grass growing and ISPMB is having to actually import hay from Canada at huge expense to feed their herd of about 100 Virginia Range mustangs.

Karen Sussman has two priorities. The first is to be able to continue to feed the horses in the preserve. A donor who had indicated that he was shipping truckloads of western hay to the preserve failed to come through. As a result, ISPMB is still having to raise funds to purchase Canadian hay.

The second priority is to reduce the herd by placing horses with other groups and responsible individuals. Karen is very reluctant to adopt horses locally due to their proximity to Canadian slaughterhouses.

Many of the horses are nice looking and are relatively friendly. If you or your group could help by accepting a few of these horses and/or assisting with hay expenses, please contact the ISPMB at http://ispmb.org or telephone 605-964-6866.

Historically the ISPMB has helped other groups with placing horses and now they need our help.

Footnote: This “problem” has developed into a full blown emergency. Additional anticipated snow did not fall and ISPMB has to relocate their horses by the end of March! Calling all advocates! This emergency will require a “team” response to be resolved.

ISPMB
PO Box 55
Lantry, SD 57636-0055
605-964-6866
605-430-2088
ispmb.org

BLM’s Advisory board meets in Oklahoma City to discuss ways to ‘control’ wild horses and burros

Posted on February 7, 2013 by Protect Mustangs

BLM Sets Meeting of National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board

for March 4-5 in Oklahoma City

The Bureau of Land Management’s National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board will meet in March in Oklahoma City to discuss issues relating to the management, protection, and control of wild horses and burros on Western public rangelands. The day-and-a-half meeting will take place on Monday, March 4, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Tuesday, March 5, from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m., local time.

The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Oklahoma City Hotel, 1 North Broadway Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102. The hotel phone number for reservations is 405-235-2780. The agenda of the meeting can be found in the February 5, 2013, Federal Register (at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-05/pdf/2013-02381.pdf).

The Advisory Board provides input and advice to the BLM as it carries out its responsibilities under the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. The law mandates the protection, management, and control of these free-roaming animals in a manner that ensures healthy herds at levels consistent with the land’s capacity to support them. According to the BLM’s latest official estimate, approximately 37,300 wild horses and burros roam on BLM-managed rangelands in 10 Western states.

The public may address the Advisory Board on Monday, March 4, at 3:30 p.m., local time. Individuals who want to make a statement at the Monday meeting should register in person with the BLM by 2 p.m., local time, on that same day at the meeting site. Depending on the number of speakers, the Board may limit the length of presentations, set at three minutes for previous meetings.

Speakers should submit a written copy of their statement to the BLM at the addresses below or bring a copy to the meeting. There may be a Webcam present during the entire meeting and individual comments may be recorded. Those who would like to comment but are unable to attend may submit a written statement to: Bureau of Land Management, National Wild Horse and Burro Program, WO-260, Attention: Ramona DeLorme, 1340 Financial Boulevard, Reno, Nevada, 89502-7147. Comments may also be e-mailed to the BLM at wildhorse@blm.gov

For additional information regarding the meeting, please contact Ramona DeLorme, Wild Horse and Burro Administrative Assistant, at 775-861-6583. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may reach Ms. DeLorme during normal business hours by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

The Advisory Board meets at least once a year and the BLM Director may call additional meetings when necessary. Members serve without salary, but are reimbursed for travel and per diem expenses according to government travel regulations.

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. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, recreational and other activities on BLM-managed land contributed more than $130 billion to the U.S. economy and supported more than 600,000 American jobs. The Bureau is also one of a handful of agencies that collects more revenue than it spends. In FY 2012, nearly $5.7 billion will be generated on lands managed by the BLM, which operates on a $1.1 billion budget. 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. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands.

–BLM–

Stop the wipe out!

Posted on August 23, 2012 by Protect Mustangs

Permission given to share

“The proposed ‘final’ management plan is outrageous,” says Anne Novak, executive director of Protect Mustangs. “They want to wipe out all the wild horses and burros at the Sheldon Refuge. They have no respect for the stakeholders or biodiversity.”

Stop the Roundups Rally in Sacramento July 10th at 2 pm outside the Federal Courthouse

Posted on July 9, 2012 by Protect Mustangs

Come to the rally to show that you care about the wild horses and burros in America.

The Sacramento Stop the Roundups Rally and Press Conference is at 2 p.m. July 10th on the sidewalk outside the Federal Courthouse across from the Amtrak station. ( 501 ” I ” Street at the 5th Street intersection in Sacramento, CA 95814)

Here is a list of speakers:

Carla Bowers, National Wild Horse Advocate

Tina Brodrick, Owner of Sonny Boys Tours

Craig Downer, Wildlife Biologist and acclaimed Wild Horse and Burro Expert

Terri Farley, Award winning writer and beloved author of The Phantom Stallion series

Cat Kindsfather, Award winning wild horse photographer

Marilyn Kroplick, MD, Board President for In Defense of Animals

Simone Netherlands, President of Respect for Horses

Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs

Jetara Séhart, Executive Director of Native Wild Horse Protection & Marin Mustangs

Robin Warren (Wild Mustang Robin), Director of The Youth Campaign for Protect Mustangs

Bring homemade signs and your friends. It will be hot so bring a rain umbrella for shade and plenty of water. Protect Mustangs encourages members of the public to carpool or take Amtrak to save on fuel and reduce pollution. Oil and gas extraction–on public land–is one of the main reasons wild horses are being wiped off their home on the range. Be part of the solution and take the train if you can.

The voiceless wild horses and burros need your help after the rally too. Give oral or written comment against helicopter roundups and attend the 6:30 pm BLM Wild Horse & Burro Helicopter/Vehicle Use Public Hearing for roundups and management. The meeting runs from 6:30-8:30 PM at the Woodlake Hotel (formerly the Radisson near Arden Fair Mall) 500 Leisure Lane in Sacramento.

“Like” and check for updates on our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/ProtectMustangs

Join the dynamic conversation on Facebook about helicopter roundups: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=387209591338066&set=a.240625045996522.58710.233633560029004&type=1&theater

Driving directions from the rally to the meeting:

Driving directions to 500 Leisure Ln, Sacramento, CA 95815

501 I St

Sacramento, CA 95814

	1. Head north on 5th St toward H St
		194 ft
	2. 5th St turns right and becomes H St
		0.8 mi
	3. Turn left onto CA-160 N/16th St Continue to follow CA-160 N
		2.3 mi
	4. Take exit 47A for Leisure Ln towardCanterbury Rd
		0.1 mi
	5. Keep left at the fork, follow signs forLeisure
		79 ft
	6. Turn left onto Leisure Ln Destination will be on the right
		354 ft

500 Leisure Ln

Sacramento, CA 95815

Special thanks to Jetara Séhart, Executive Director of Native Wild Horse Protection & Marin Mustangs for her help to put together this event.

If you have any questions or would like to speak at the rally feel free to send us an email at Contact@ProtectMustangs.org

BREAKING News: The BLM is pressing charges against 2 American citizens who attended the Yuma burro roundup on June 10th.

Posted on June 12, 2012 by Protect Mustangs

Update about the situation June 13th

Dear friends of wild horses and burros. I want to share the latest information from the Bureau of Land Management about the incident at Yuma. Below is an email from Tom Gorey

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Response to your e-mail
From: “Gorey, Tom” <TGorey@blm.gov>
Date: Wed, June 13, 2012 9:29 am
To: Anne protectmustangs
<anne@protectmustangs.org>

Today’s statement:

This investigation is ongoing and charges are pending, and until finalized, we are not providing additional information. Court documents are typically a matter of public record and should be available when charges are finalized through the courts. When the venue is confirmed, the BLM will be able to respond to requests for this information.

Yesterday’s statement:

On June 10, 2012, two public observers were contacted by BLM Law Enforcement Rangers outside the designated viewing area. One of the individuals (MROZEK-MALE) had been previously asked on numerous occasions to leave the viewing area based on his failure to comply with instructions from law enforcement officers. The other individual (HAYDEN-FEMALE), who was in a restricted area, was asked repeatedly to move to the designated viewing area, for her safety and the safety of those involved in the gather operations, and she refused to comply. Rangers had to make physical contact with both individuals to gain compliance. Both individuals were detained pending charges. Both individuals were placed in air conditioned law enforcement vehicles. Both individuals requested medical attention. Ambulances were called at their request. One individual was transported by ambulance. One individual was evaluated and released at the scene. Charges are pending against both individuals.

Here is an article just published at Horseback Magazine: http://horsebackmagazine.com/hb/archives/16188/comment-page-1#comment-13757

More information coming soon.