A dark day for native wild horses ~ National Academy of Science Report published

Photo courtesy BLM

Photo courtesy BLM

The NAS report has been released and is found here.

 

Statement from Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs

We are grateful that the National Academy of Science (NAS) recommends stopping cruel roundups  but we challenge their decision to control alleged overpopulation like a domestic herd with humans deciding who survives and breeds.

NAS deploys the BLM overpopulation myth to push EPA restricted use PESTICIDES (Immunoconraceptive PZP & GonaCon®) as well as sterilization on Native #WildHorses.

This is part of the plan named after Ken Salazar, the previous Secretary of Interior, whose mission was to wipe wild horses off public land, stockpile them at taxpayer expense and send many into the alleged slaughter pipeline.

The Salazar Plan began in 2009 -10, despite public outrage. Its focus was to remove wild horses and burros to facilitate the energy and water grab on public land.

The renewables market abroad is hot. Fracking and exporting natural gas through pipelines across the West is causing environmental damage. Wild horses would require mitigation so they lobbied for the BLM to get rid of them.

The Salazar Plan feigns an overpopulation crisis to remove most native wild horses from their legally designated ranges and stockpile them in government holding. They are torn from their homes, families and at risk of being sold to probable slaughter.

Overpopulation is a MYTH used to ruin native wild horses. There are maybe 18,000 wild horses left on more than 31.6 million acres of public land designated for their use. They are reproducing at a higher rate because nature knows they face extinction from the gluttony of roundups since 2009. Immunocontraceptives are risky. Sterilizing them is wrong. Put the 50,000 in holding back on the range so they can fill their niche in the ecosystem.

We are witnessing the final attack on the indigenous horse and it must be halted.

Man-made fertility control will domesticate wild horses and wipe them out. Survival of the fittest is Mother Nature’s way to select who breeds to protect the herd.

Domestic horses are manipulated by man. Their weaknesses are evident as a result.

We ask the NAS, the BLM and certain members of the advocate community, “Do you really think man can choose who breeds better than nature? Do you realize that by supporting chemical fertility control many will be sterilized and loose their place in the herd?”  What happens when they all die off?  Will you then realize they were never overpopulated?”

# # #

 

Statement from Jesica Johnston, MA Environmental Planning

The National Academy of Science’s findings clearly state that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has failed to provide accurate estimates of the nation’s population of wild horses and burros. Therefore, the NAS cannot conclude that a state of over-population exists and or provide a recommendation for artificial management considerations such as “rigorous fertility controls” to control populations for which the complex population dynamics are currently unknown. However, the NAS is recommending science-based methods to improve current management practices, population estimates, and the overall health of the ecosystem which could provide key information toward sustainable and effective management that could prevent the removal of wild horses and burros from our public lands.

# # #

Dead wild horse (Photo © Craig Downer)

Dead wild horse (Photo © Craig Downer)

Statement from Craig C. Downer, M.S., Wildlife Biologist, Wild Horse Expert, Author and Founder of the Andean Tapir Fund

BLM plans to use “aggressive birth control” to prevent the expansion of the wild horse/burro populations that remain. Chief among the drugs to be used is PZP (porcine zona pellucida). This injected drug covers the eggs, or ova, of mares, preventing sperm from fertilizing them. It is experimental, however, and has some questionable effects upon the horses themselves, both individually and collectively. For example, its effect leads to mares’ repeatedly recycling into estrous, thus stimulating stallions to repeatedly mount the treated mares — all to no avail. This frustrating situation causes much stress among individuals of both sexes and a general disruption of the social order, both within bands and, as a consequence, within the herds themselves.

Other unintended consequences of PZP are out-of-season births occurring after PZP’s effect has worn off after a year or two.  These births have been observed during the colder late autumn and winter seasons (e.g. Pryor Mountains her by G. Kathrens) and their un-timeliness causes suffering and death among both foals and their mothers.

# # #

The underside of a skull, showing palate and teeth, of Equus scotti is seen in this photo provided by the San Bernardino County Museum. The remains of the Ice Age horse were found for the first time at Tule Springs in Nevada.

The underside of a skull, showing palate and teeth, of Equus scotti is seen in this photo provided by the San Bernardino County Museum. The remains of the Ice Age horse were found for the first time at Tule Springs in Nevada.

Statement from Debbie Coffey, Director of Wild Horse Affairs, Wild Horse Freedom Federation

PZP and other fertility control should NOT be used on non-viable herds.   Most of the remaining herds of wild horses are non-viable.  The NAS and any advocacy groups that are pushing PZP and other fertility control have not carefully studied all of the caveats in Dr. Gus Cothran’s genetic analysis reports along with the remaining population of each herd of wild horses.
# # #

 

By U.S. Government [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

By U.S. Government [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Statement from Jennie Barron, Director of Wild Horse Hub Central

1. Wild horse mares that are darted with PZP can become permanently sterile, making the viability of the herd impossible as the older mares die, there are no mares to have foals.

2.  If the Lead Mares are darted with PZP, they can become sterile, making the family herd disorganized; the stallion does not understand why she won’t foal; and she may leave the family herd she knows because of the disorientated. This has happened with older mares as they are not able to foal and they are the lead mares, leaving no mare to teach them where to graze, find minerals, water, or when to do certain things that wild horse herd families do.

3.  The mares who are pregnant after they have been darted with PZP can and do foal out of season. This means that they can not keep enough milk for the foal; and the winter weather is too harsh for the foal to survive. Prognosis: death.

4.  Considering the consequences stated above, this is too risky a business to lay at the feet of an already depleted wild horse herd. It must be taken into consideration that PZP is just as dangerous as a mountain lion, it is permanent, and it is deadly.

# # #

(Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

(Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

Statement from Carl Mrozek, Filmmaker of Saving Ass in America

To its credit the extensive review of the BLM’s failed Wild Horse & Burro Program criticized the agency for relying primarily on aggressive culling of wild herds primarily via helicopter roundups which “perpetuate the overpopulation problem by maintaining the number of animals at levels below the carrying capacity of the land, protecting the rangeland and the horse population in the short term but resulting in continually high population growth and exacerbating the long-term problem” the National Academy of Sciences” declared in a preliminary press release.  What they’re referring to is the principle of compensatory reproduction by heavily-stressed wildlife populations needing to rebound from population declines due to many factors.

Unfortunately, they quickly recommend a different intervention as a better solution without considering the ‘ do nothing”  or ‘placebo’ option which is an integral component of every credible field trial for pharmaceutical and other ‘treatment plans. Had they searched for examples of herds which have undergone minimal or no culling in the past decade or so, they would have found multiple examples of herds which appear to have achieved homeostasis (equilibrium) or something approaching it, naturally, i.e. without BLM-sponsored roundups or fertility treatments.

At least two mustang herds I’ve observed and filmed in Nevada and Arizona over the past 5-7 years meet those criteria, and some burro herds as well. The important point to remember, is that all of those herds cost the taxpayer virtually zilch to maintain in the wild. This contrasts with the cash-intensive hands-on management strategy revolving around helicopter roundups, warehousing of captured animals for life in long term and short term corrals and feedlots, as well as the fertility treatments, -the least costly and disruptive of these predominant management methodologies.

The bottom line is that sometimes we can do more, and do better, by doing less, or by letting Mother Nature do what she does best: sow and weed.

Hopefully, this option is explored somewhere in the freshly released report, and will be actively considered by the new hierarchy at BLM and the Dept. of Interior, and with much more intensive collaboration with wild equine afiscionados  committed to the survival of these herds in the wild as intended by the Free Ranging Wild Horse & Burro Act of 1971.

# # #

 

PM Hazard Foter Public domain Marked Sterilize

 

Statement from  Jaime Jackson, Executive Director and the founder of the Association for the Advancement of Natural Horse Care Practices

“Whether wild horses are sterilized or chemically “contraceptized”, at stake are the forces of natural selection being usurped by what will be tantamount to a program of “domestication eugenics” — humans determining who gets to breed and who doesn’t in wild horse country. If that door is opened, we will have turned drug companies and profiteers loose on our wild horses. We now know with certainty that such veterinary/medical interventions cause laminitis, colic, and other types of metabolic breakdown and disease. More drugs will then be needed. Thus, more profits will be pocketed. A brutal cycle is unleashed that causes harm to any horse, wild or domesticated.

“…What we are talking about here is the de facto domestication and subsequent contamination and destruction of America’s wild, free-roaming horses. It is bad enough what we’re also doing to another 51,000 who are captured, and stand idly by at tax payers expense in government holding corrals and private “preserves”? Support the misguided’s push to turn wild horses into pathological parodies of their personal horses? No thanks!

“The AANHCP offers another vision for genuine wild horse preservation that clear thinking people should be able to understand. This vision will do all things that eugenics can never do. And humanely so without compromising natural selection or burdening the tax payer. So, if you really want to help our wild horses, say no to the Obama Administration and the National Academy of Science’s “zero them out” for the corporate land grab, say no to [any] eugenics visions, and no to the drug companies and PZP (and other) pharmaceutical patent holders hungering for the ovaries, testes, and DNA of our America’s wild, free-roaming horses in the name of profiteering at the animal’s genetic expense.

# # #

Sam (#3275) is from California's High Rock area (Photo by BLM)

Sam (#3275) is from California’s High Rock area (Photo by BLM)

Statement from Valerie Price, Biological Researcher

PZP is a pathogen derived immunocontraceptive vaccine, it SHOULD be intended for use ONLY in captive animals. PZP stands for Porcine Zona Pellucida. This, and other immunocontraceptive vaccines are derived from pathogenic bacterias. PZP contains Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the organism that causes tuberculosis in humans and many species of livestock, including cattle. The bacterial component of the vaccine is supposed to be a killed form, but due to the potential for bad lots causing live tuberculosis to be transmitted to humans and animals, and due to concern over the possibility of contaminating the food web, PZP would have been unlikely to recieve approval by the FDA. Instead, the EPA approved PZP as a pesticide, leaving public health professionals in ignorance of the biological nature of this vaccine. It remains unclear whether the restrictions for use allow for any PZP treated animals to be released into the wild. While such a release could pose an ongoing threat to public health for both humans and animals, the effectiveness of PZP as an immunocontraceptive vaccine is negated by only 10% immigration or emmigration into treated herds, according to a study conducted by Texas Parks and Wildlife with captive, white tail deer.

A recent clinical study in cats treated with PZP found a high percentage of injection site abscesses. Rumours of abscesses occurring in horses treated with PZP by the BLM has raised the spectre of possible bad lots of vaccine already having been used. Human exposure to tuberculosis could possibly be a concern and it is recommended that all BLM agents and equine advocates who have come in contact with the vaccine, or with treated animals, be tested for tuberculosis, to ensure the bio-security of the public.

# # #

PM Gov Land Map.jpg.jpe

Statement from Lisa LeBlanc, Independent Researcher & Equine Advocate:
We can not depend on ‘estimates’ of on-the-range populations or the accuracy of ‘reports’ of nearly 50,000 in captivity; neither history nor biology support the Bureau’s claims. There is a supposition that wild equine advocates have no notion of the enormity of wild or captive wild populations due to a ‘sympathetic’ response, but we can only base our data on the information we’re given, and the knowledge we already possess. For example:

Absence of any data indicating mortality, either on-the-range or in holding.

Denial of ‘reciprocal’ breeding, that is, the animal’s biological imperative to replace what’s been taken.

Absence of knowledge of specific herds and their behaviors, key factors in determining accuracy of foaling rates, which often fall far below the National average of 20%.

On-the-range herd management must be as accurate as possible, visually documented for Public use and managed through science and study. How can effective management occur if the basis of all aspects is ‘estimate’?

# # #

 

Check back for more statements from wild horse and burro influencers. We are updating this page.

 

National Academy of Science Report on Wild Horses and Burros

Cross-posted from: http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13511

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCEDate:  June 5, 2013FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:New Report Offers Science-Based Strategies for Management of Western Free-Ranging Horses and Burros; ‘Business-as-Usual’ Practices Will Be Increasingly Expensive and Unproductive for BLM

 

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) current practice of removing free-ranging horses from public lands promotes a high population growth rate, and maintaining them in long-term holding facilities is both economically unsustainable and incongruent with public expectations, says a new report by the National Research Council.  The report says that tools already exist for BLM to better manage horses and burros on healthy ecosystems, enhance public engagement and confidence, and make the program more financially sustainable.  It also provides evidence-based approaches that, if widely and consistently implemented, can improve the management of these animals on public lands in the western U.S.

 

The committee that wrote the report determined that most free-ranging horse populations are growing at 15 percent to 20 percent a year, meaning these populations could double in four years and triple in six years.  With no intervention by BLM, the horse population will increase to the point of self-limitation, where both degradation of the land and high rates of horse mortality will occur due to inadequate forage and water.  In addition, periodic droughts, many of them severe, in the western public lands cause immediate and often unpredicted impacts.  There is little if any public support for allowing these impacts on either the horse population or the land to take place, and both go against BLM’s program mission.  However, the current removal strategy used by BLM perpetuates the overpopulation problem by maintaining the number of animals at levels below the carrying capacity of the land, protecting the rangeland and the horse population in the short term but resulting in continually high population growth and exacerbating the long-term problem.

 

To manage horse populations without periodic removals, widespread and consistent application of fertility control would be required, the committee determined.  Three methods in particular — porcine zona pellucida (PZP) and GonaCon™ for mares and chemical vasectomy for stallions — were identified as effective approaches.

 

“The committee recommended these approaches based on the evidence of their efficacy with other populations, notably the horses on Assateague Island, but cautioned that scaling up use of these methods to the larger and more disseminated horse populations in the western U.S. will be challenging,” said Guy Palmer, a veterinarian with Washington State University and chair of the study committee.

 

The committee also strongly recommended that BLM improve and standardize its methodology to estimate population size, stressing the importance of accurate counts as the basis for all management strategies.  A large body of scientific literature suggests that the proportion of animals missed in current surveys ranges from 10 percent to 50 percent.

 

Additionally, an examination of the genetics and health of population groups as well as of the range lands they occupy can be used to assure that both the animal populations and the ecosystem are being appropriately managed.  Developing an iterative process whereby public participants could engage with BLM personnel scientists on data gathering and assessment would increase the transparency, quality, and acceptance of BLM’s decision-making process.

 

The study was sponsored by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.  The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies.  They are private, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a congressional charter.  Panel members, who serve pro bono as volunteers, are chosen by the Academies for each study based on their expertise and experience and must satisfy the Academies’ conflict-of-interest standards.  The resulting consensus reports undergo external peer review before completion.  A committee roster follows.

 

 

Contacts:

Lorin Hancock, Media Relations Officer

Rachel Brody, Media Relations Assistant

Office of News and Public Information

202-334-2138; e-mail news@nas.edu

 

Additional resources:

Report-in-brief

Project Website
Video

Webinar
Pre-publication copies of Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program: A Way Forward are available from the National Academies Press on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu or by calling tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242.  Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above).

 

#       #       #

 

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

Division of Earth and Life Studies

Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources

 

Committee to Review the Bureau of Land Management

Wild Horse and Burro Management Program

 

 

Guy H. Palmer1 (chair)

Regents Professor of Pathology and Infectious  Diseases;

Jan and Jack Creighton Endowed Chair

  in Global Health; and

Director

Paul G. Allen School for Global Animal Health

Washington State University

Pullman

Cheryl S. Asa

Director of Research, and

Director

Association of Zoos and Acquariums Wildlife Contraception Center

St. Louis Zoological Park

St. Louis

 

Erik A. Beever

Research Ecologist

U.S. Geological Survey

Bozeman, Mont.

 

Michael B. Coughenour

Senior Research Scientist

Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory

Colorado State University

Fort Collins

 

Lori S. Eggert

Assistant Professor

Department of Biological Sciences

University of Missouri

Columbia

 

Robert Garrott

Professor

Department of Ecology

Montana State University

Bozeman

 

Lynn Huntsinger

Professor of Rangeland Management

Department of Society and Environment

University of California

Berkeley

 

Linda E. Kalof

Professor and Fellow

Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics

Michigan State University

East Lansing

 

   Paul R. Krausman

Professor

Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences

University of Montana

Missoula

 

Madan K. Oli

Professor

University of Florida

Gainesville

 

Steven Petersen

Assistant Professor

Brigham Young University

Provo, Utah

 

David M. Powell

Research Associate

Department of Conservation Biology

Wildlife Conservation Society

Bronx Zoo

New York City

 

Daniel I. Rubenstein

Chair

Department of Ecology  and Evolutionary Biology

Princeton University

Princeton, N.J.

 

David S. Thain

Assistant Professor

Department of Agriculture, Nutrition, and Veterinary Science

University of Nevada

Reno

 

STAFF

 

Kara N. Laney

Study Director

 

_________________________________________

1 Member, Institute of Medicine

National Academy of Science Review to be released Wed

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