“The heaviest penalty for declining to rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself.”
― Plato, The Republic
We have several situations ongoing between those who disfavor PZP, and those who favor PZP, within Horse Advocacy and sound Ecological Practices. So let’s start with an often quoted situation – From the East Coast and Assateague. This brought to light after perusing those scientists involved in the also often quoted NRC paper from the National Academy of Science, or as many legitimate research scientists phrase it — AKA Bogus Science and Profiteering Stampeding Their Way into Wild Horse Country!
What we are finding is the scientists involved, most of them, academic and from CPSU units within a college environment, directly attached to government grants on a consistent basis, and most at colleges that cater to ranching and Big AG agriculture support dynamics, did have conflict of interest motives – ALL!
“Because the “limits” put upon the NRC 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 scientific
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 spearheaded by the AANHCP. That is a fact — and it is a fact also that these scientists, and the special interests that fund them, refuse to embrace NHC because what we do and advocate for gets directly to the bottom of their — ethics –- profiteering — and slavish academic close-minded-ness.”
Then we go to the so often quoted and ironic “positive situation of “. . . Assateague, in fact, was not good science, any more 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 their own 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 NRC authors stated that predation behavior was not viable, ignoring Dr. John Turner’s mountain lion predation studies referenced in many books, and one very prominent “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 NRC 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 conception.”
“I also gleaned the biographies of each scientist to see if there were personal conflicts of interest, what kind of understanding they would bring to the table regarding horse care based on their education and training, and if they seemed like “clear minded” people who could think outside the box in the best interest of any horse, wild or domesticated. My opinion is that our wild horses are in trouble if their recommendations are followed.”
“The reader should know, it is the science community that has recently aided and abetted the government (the EPA) in reclassifying wild horses legally as “pests” so that the pesticide PZP can be used on them for birth control purposes. You see, the NRC 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 the wild horse herds deteriorate genetically
under the government’s eugenics program of selective sterilization and contraception,
which will be driven by profit and the corporate land/resource grab that wants no protected wild
horses in the way. In fact, the report cautions that “public confidence” and trust will be an important
part of any 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 either.”
One thing is certain here, the fact that the BLM is attempting to cover up their mess, by once again making another mess – this time with support from a few Advocates and other supporters with good intention in mind, but have indeed been deceived! A white paper will follow this, and references quoted that have been used here – The fact is, the PZP should have been rejected long ago, and the natural process developed and managed properly, would by now be well on the way to positive attribute to Wild Horses and our Environment Systems – but BLM and DOI, and other profiteering individuals would have been reduced in personnel, and methodology of cloaking and covering up monetary scams ripping taxpayer money off would have disappeared altogether.
Reference: “Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program: A Way Forward (2013)
Report of the National Resource Council of the National Academy of Sciences” AKA Bogus Science and Profiteering Stampeding Their Way into Wild Horse Country by Jaime Jackson, AANHCP Executive Director, June 9, 2013.
November 5, 2014 at 2:14 am
Thank you for sharing those ideas, Photo/Journalist.
And here is a bit more on the same subject:
“The Wild Horse and Burro Program has not used scientifically rigorous methods to estimate the population sizes of horses and burros” (NAS)
The NAS should have STOPPED right there in their report because you can’t even manage a turnip patch if you don’t know how many turnips you are farming and the BLM has NO evidence of their exaggerated wild horse and burro population estimates.
November 5, 2014 at 7:56 am
Reblogged this on Pass the SAFE Act! and commented:
Excellent analogy. Could not agree with you more. It is truly unconscionable for this drug to be administered to animals that are already very compromised. The sad reality is that they are considered “vermin” and have been listed as “feral” and listed as such under “invasive species.” So it makes perfect sense that they would want to administer a drug that truly has not been thoroughly researched and tested, to an animal that they are determined to see wiped out completely. Sad beyond words that advocates cannot see the trees for the forest.
November 5, 2014 at 9:47 pm
America’s Wild Horses and Burros should NEVER have been removed from their Legal Herd Management Areas in the first place.
The answer to the “problem” is to put them back where they so rightfully belong.
A biologist’s response to the BLM’s wild horse “problem” (excerpt)
By Robert C. Bauer
REPRODUCTION, MORTALITY, AND OVERPOPULATION IN WILD EQUIDS by ROBERT C. BAUER,
B.S. in Biology
The rangelands, however, can easily sustain not only the wild horses and burros existing out there now, but also every one of those in holding facilities, which now number well over 40,000.
The truth is that every one of those wild horses and burros in holding facilities, if released back to the areas from which they were taken, along with those in the wild, would help bring the balance back to the rangelands, a balance that is so very vital!
November 5, 2014 at 9:52 pm
ISPMB HERDS SHOW THAT FUNCTIONAL SOCIAL STRUCTURES CONTRIBUTE TO LOW HERD GROWTH COMPARED TO BLM MANAGED HERDS
Click to access ISPMB_newsletter_Spring_2014.pdf
As we complete our thirteenth year in studying the White Sands and Gila herds, two isolated herds, which live in similar habitat but represent two different horse cultures, have demonstrated much lower reproductive rates than BLM managed herds. Maintaining the “herd integrity” with a hands off management strategy (“minimal feasible management”) and no removals in 13 years has shown us that functional herds demonstrating strong social bonds and leadership of elder animals is key to the behavioral management of population growth.
ISPMB’s president, Karen Sussman, who has monitored and studied ISPMB’s four wild herds all these years explains, “We would ascertain from our data that due to BLM’s constant roundups causing the continual disruption of the very intricate social structures of the harem bands has allowed younger stallions to take over losing the mentorship of the older wiser stallions.
In simplistic terms Sussman makes the analogy that over time Harvard professors (elder wiser stallions) have been replaced by errant teenagers (younger bachelor stallions). We know that generally teenagers do not make good parents because they are children themselves.
Sussman’s observations of her two stable herds show that there is tremendous respect commanded amongst the harems. Bachelor stallions learn that respect from their natal harems. Bachelors usually don’t take their own harems until they are ten years of age. Sussman has observed that stallions mature emotionally at much slower rates than mares and at age ten they appear ready to assume the awesome responsibility of becoming a harem stallion.
Also observed in these herds is the length of time that fillies remain with their natal bands. The fillies leave when they are bred by an outside stallion at the age of four or five years. Often as first time mothers, they do quite well with their foals but foal mortality is higher than with seasoned mothers.
Sussman has also observed in her Gila herd where the harems work together for the good of the entire herd. “Seeing this cooperative effort is quite exciting,” states Sussman.
ISPMB’s third herd, the Catnips, coming from the Sheldon Wildlife Range where efforts are underway to eliminate all horses on the refuge, demonstrate exactly the reverse of the organization’s two stable herds. The first year of their arrival (2004) their fertility rates were 30% the following first and second years. They have loose band formations and some mares are without any harem stallions. Stallions are observed breeding fillies as young as one year of age. Foal mortality is very high in this herd. Generally there is a lack of leadership and wisdom noted in the stallions as most of them were not older than ten years of age when they arrived. In 2007, a decision to use PZP on this herd, a contraceptive, was employed by ISPMB. This herd remains a very interesting herd to study over time according to Sussman. “The question is, can a dysfunctional herd become functional,” says Sussman who speculates that the Catnips emulate many of the public lands herds.
In 1992 when Sussman and her colleague, Mary Ann Simonds, served on the National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board, they believed that BLM’s management should change and recommended that selective removals should begin by turning back all the older and wiser animals to retain the herd wisdom. Sussman realizes that the missing ingredient was to stop the destruction of the harem bands caused by helicopter roundups where stallions are separated from their mares. “Instead, bait and water trapping, band by band, needed to be instituted immediately,” says Sussman. Had this been done for the past twenty years, we would have functionally healthy horses who have stable reproductive rates and we wouldn’t have had 52,000 wild horses in holding pastures today. BLM’s selective removal policy was to return all horses over the age of five. When the stallions and mares were released back to their herd management areas by the BLM, younger stallions under the age of ten fought for the mares and took mares from the older wiser stallions. This occurs when there is chaos happening in a herd such as roundups cause.
Sussman also believes that when roundups happen often the younger stallions aged 6-9 are ones that evade capture. This again contributes to younger stallions taking the place of older wiser stallions that remain with their mares and do not evade capture. She is advocating that the BLM carry out two studies: determining the age of fillies who are pregnant and determining age structures of stallions after removals.
Currently Sussman is developing criteria to determine whether bands are behaviorally healthy or not. This could be instituted easily in observation of public lands horses.
November 5, 2014 at 10:15 pm
what will become of the blm when they continue their pratice of running the previledged ranchers out of buisiness after they have run out of horses to scapegoat? i never thought the drugs were a very good idea anyways . and now that conservtives have all the upper seats are in both houses are they going to be any easier to talk with and now that dirty harry has been booted down what can be changed? is there any glimmer of hope for our wild brothers and sisters . what will happen to the other wildlife, too ? will we still get the cold shoulder and no respondse’s ? lots of question as i see about can we question the new congress about getting us some real numbers and some sanity to get these apointees/reapointed toward the nearest door ?
November 6, 2014 at 12:03 am
Reblogged this on cindymendoza47 and commented:
lots of sane advise but to bad the blm just wanted to destroy something very good for america.