Monthly Archives: July 2022

We see a lot of articles and writing, in particular from commercialized non-profits, and DOI/BLM, in regard to Wild Horses. We analyze data as well as these articles, for content, and purposely search for misinformation, or disinformation-outlet campaigns, and how they stitch their False Narratives together.

How to identify false narrative or disinformation is simple, once you know how to look, as observation is a taught situation, in order to do it well. We leave out bias, and simply look at the raw data, if available. How much of it is correct, how much of it is a lie, and how much of it is simply meant to manipulate.

First, we look at the content. Often, when people write their articles, they remain shallow, little to no informative content, but a lot of rhetoric, in an attempt to make it appear worth reading (i.e., many journalists do this for advertising in their papers, or television news-story-sets).

Yes, the commercialized non-profits compete for the donation dollars, as well as taxpayer funded Grants. Very competitive. In government, the competition between agencies, for larger budgets, is just as vast a competition for the taxpayer dollars.

The reality is, many of the articles about the wild horses remains very superficial in content – due to being written by those we call “Arm Chair Warriors”; or, within another explanation, people that do not know what it is they do not know, and most lack field-experience or any experience with horses at all, or simply not the athletic type, so stays clear of horses, yet writes about them from reference-materials only.

This is also a sign of manipulative articles, as how would they know how to resolve something, with no direct experience with the subject? Well, as we see constantly, their resolutions has nothing to do with resolving the matters or problems at hand, but rather, opens the door to perpetuate more income, i.e. from donations or taxpayer grants, and why we see, over the past 20 years, extreme profits made by commercialized non-profits. The DOI/BLM inadequate, or, their fraudulent communications of the same nature, while they also perpetuate their extreme government agency budgets, and welfare rancher subsidies via Disinformation Campaigns (i.e. blaming the wild horses for everything). We also discover nothing really positive develops for the wild horses, other than being Darted with a Pesticide.

Yup, we cannot make this stuff up, and it must be placed into perspective. The past 20 years of commercialized non-profit involvement, and the only thing we see, from $-millions of dollars in donations being given to them, the situation for the wild horses simply worse, their numbers going down, and Fraudulent activity, in both government and commercialized non-profits, going upward. Tremendous profits follow . . .

Their research is accomplished on the Internet, reference material, et al. Then for photos, they will go out, find perhaps a small band of wild horses, take their photo with the horses in the background, then tell us all of their adventures while observing the wild horses. Or, the city “Arm Chair Warriors,” will simply obtain photos from the Internet, as there are plenty to draw from. So, what is it that separates the good article or informative article, from a not so good, superficial piece of tripe, with no informative content to grab hold of, for the reader to become well-informed?

First, you have to remember, within this greedy realm of profiteers and grifters, is the fact they do not want you to know a whole lot of the subject matter – about wild horses; rather, the required “just enough info” to uplift a little curiosity, then padded by emotional outcry of how they just “love” the wild horses, and “Poof” the disinformation starts to flow, and plenty of it. The reader is left with an assumption only, and assume they obtained a lot of info for future discussion, until they start discussing the info with someone that knows the subject very well, then reality kicks-in.

So, what was left out of all this information? Content of a truthful nature, or reality. Often in propaganda, or the other term for it = Disinformation, is cloaked with rhetorical phrases, rather than actual reality-based content – Sales folks. Reality is boring, and achieves low sales-margins. Place a little drama into the equation of their rhetoric, and sales boom skyward. This equates, in the commercialized non-profit world, to enhance their donation trains, for consistency and high profit margins, as well as less-knowledgeable dedicated-followers of non-profit groups, et al.

But what is hidden, by rhetorical distractions’, or false narratives, is the writer’s experience with wild horses; thereby, we can explain the superficiality of the writing, when one leaves the article feeling as though something was missed, something not communicated, and worse yet, the feeling that too many things left unknown. In another word, we read the article to obtain information, but no true information was given. The writer simply pandered to the readers lack of knowledge about the subject, so simply made stuff up, to make themselves sound knowledgeable. Yes, ethics has left the building.

So now – you know. Yes, many have difficulty, oddly, “not supporting” those who lie to us all. Bias, I suppose, and the “wanting” to believe these people have a resolution. Then the years pile up, and we see no resolutions at all, and then realize we’ve all been sold a bill of rhetorical bullshit, mostly from wind-bags and grifters. None the less, people remain supporting these same liars, ironically, and some people defend them.

Resolution-Paradigms are meant to fix the problem. The more serious the problem, the more detailed the resolution will be. Good writer’s point out the problem, the science, the data, the statistics, and a history of the problem, from experience . . . Most often, this information cannot be retrieved from the Internet or library, but field work must be accomplished, and most often over years of observation and data collecting — not a week or two in the field, and now ready for resolution, and more articles to draw-donations to them, calling it field work.

Feel free to ask me, or others who are truthful about sharing good, or quality information, how to “read” or identify bad writers, bad science, or rhetorical bullshit that really means nothing at all. We see it in many of the commercialized and competitive non-profits articles, so just start there. The fact is that any of those commercialized non-profits that support Darting, write nothing but propaganda, meant to  stir up emotions through Disinformation Campaigns – but they are not really that good at it, even though profitable.

{Note} A disinformation Campaign asks the donators for Direct Action (i.e. Contribution). The Action? To file a TRO (e.g. Temporary Restraining Order) mid to late year of the donation year. This sets up a end of year donation drive (i.e. from Disinformation) to file the TRO in Federal Court via donations received. The fact is, any of these commercialized non-profits will receive anywhere from $15,000 to $150,000 to file a TRO, which purpose is too start a Federal Court Proceeding – but, often just the TRO is filed for, costing anywhere from $850.00 to $2,100 (you see the profit margin take hold here, just for show-sake and nothing more.

Once the TRO filed with the courts, and time passes, into the next year, the TRO forgotten about, no follow through ever developed, and at high-dollar donation stream = commercial non-profit Net becomes very high, and the proceeds only cost $850 to perhaps $2,100. If we assimilate the higher margins, we find a $2,100 underline cost, and a $147,900 profit – and no court action beyond the TRO takes place. A year down the road and all the donators have forgotten, and the commercialized non-profits onto yet another Disinformation Campaign for Donations.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is Your Donation Money at Work – for the commercialized non-profit, certainly NOT for the Wild Horses! In no way, shape, or form. You have just been “Had”!

Let’s speak truth about Pesticide PZP! Insight to how propaganda/disinformation campaign works.

This morning I read a long, disturbing article, titled “FERTILITY CONTROL”. It is an AWHC propaganda piece about Pesticide PZP. What an excellent example of Propaganda or Disinformation, and not surprised, packed with False-Narratives and misinformation exclusively, throughout the article.

First, keep in mind we have 7 years of letters, from FDA correspondence (who rejected the Pesticide PZP due to its obvious nature of being a Pesticide) to and from the HSUS.  Then we go to more letters to and from the EPA – basically the HSUS attempts to convince the EPA it is not a Pesticide – the EPA states consistently, “clearly” (the EPA’s terminology not mine, in the letters) it is a Pesticide, and agreed with the FDA, that it is a Pesticide.

We also observe a lot of physical evidence as well as the mental-stress forced upon the Wild Horses and family bands on the range — quite obvious the narratives by those who make money off Darting Wild Horses with this Pesticide, remains prejudicial throughout their Disinformation Campaigns, and some state, “. . . very arrogantly ignorant, and their information forced upon people, just as they force-darts into a Wild Horse to kill it, then refer to it as “Saving Them.”

AWHC says:  Is PZP a pesticide? The PZP vaccine is not a pesticide. It is an extremely well-vetted immunocontraceptive vaccine that has been used for 40 years in many wildlife species including wild horses. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) turned registration of the vaccine over to the EPA, since it was developed for use in the environment on a wildlife species (wild horses). Since the EPA has no category for “wildlife contraception,” it processed PZP under the “pesticide” category as the only available process for registering the vaccine for use. The label is purely bureaucratic; it has no scientific or practical meaning. The PZP vaccine is produced by the non-profit Science and Conservation Center, which pioneered its use in wildlife and provides it to the BLM and other entities at a financial loss.

We call bullshit nothing more than bullshit!

1. An Immunocontraceptive is a situation that works along-side the inner-workings of a species, not in competition nor destructively within it. So we discover the term itself, very questionable in how they write about it to the Public, who really do not know the difference.  In reality, Horse coats become dull, with an awareness of something “wrong” with the wild horse just by looking at its physical disruptive appearance. Then we get into the mental state, Horse Family Band decay, then breakup, and family bands weakened to the point of non-existent. Their “survival-skills” in wilderness areas compromised.

2. The article covers a general and passive outlook for this experimental situation (quite costly to taxpayers as well), after 40 years of still being experimental (yes, something is wrong here and they know, yet still keep selling it under False-Narratives $$$$), but the money, taxpayer money, good, so who cares?  They sure as hell don’t!

3. We look at the DOI/BLM numbers of Wild Horse Populations in the 11 Western States, and we see, basically, the Pesticide PZP does not work at all.  Roundups have increased (which stopping roundups was the supposed resolution, and reasoning for using the Pesticide PZP, but does not do so)! Then we look at the REALITY — THERE IS NO TRUTHFUL OVERPOPULATION OF WILD HORSES ON PUBLIC LANDS, AND CANNOT BE CREDIBLY PROVEN, OR SHOWN, THAT AN OVERPOPULATION EXISTS WHAT SO EVER. So one has got to ask the obvious question, why even use Pesticide PZP? Then we start to uncover the Corruption, that is evident within the Grazing Permit Programs, and we find the Pesticide PZP nothing more than a distraction, a coverup.

4. Skipping over all the non-sense of their article, which is vast and a “Read” that pisses even the most least knowledgeable person off, due to the vast amount of misinformation (from a Disinformation Campaign precisely), and terms that flow into Disinformation (i.e. propaganda structured and false narratives abound), and we find distraction, confusion, and outright lies about the Pesticide PZP.

Myself and others could write books upon how misinformation and disinformation is allocated manipulatively, within context of written matter, but we are experiencing it first-hand in the field right now, today, as they write this type of gibberish which is in this article by AWHC.  We find none of the information really helpful, and all of it pretty much lies, that support previous lies.  Then they attempt to make it appear as science – which it is not – It is a Pesticide, and rated a Pesticide within a proper context – because it interacts in the Wild Horses as a Pesticide. 

Their evidence, is not available in real-time research form, as the originator of the Pesticide PZP, his statement, was that, he has a lot of conclusive research data in his head, that did not make it to paper-drafts explaining the research.  There is no conclusive-data available as evidence in his research, of anything mentioned in this article by AWHC.

The Scientific Peer Reviews were done by those who are also making a lot of money on the sales of Pesticide PZP . . . ; which, truly benefits them all, from the “lack of” scientific-data they are so fond of exploiting – and why not, it is unavailable for perusal, to deduct whether their experimentation even worked. This sets up a situation of catastrophe entirely; which, also opens the door for them to make the science up as they go, or whatever needed at the time, because no base-science, nor research, exists to refer to, as far as authenticity and whether it works or not.

We have seen this type of delusional information previously, from the cigarette industry propaganda, oil industry propaganda, the disinformation campaigns that promoted Agent Orange as a defoliant and safe to use, and the disinformation campaigns that also promote beef today.

So the AWHC then asks, Is PZP Effective? Yes, the NAS stated that PZP is the most promising method for managing wild horse populations. Numerous studies have also demonstrated the effectiveness of PZP. The efficacy rate is 95-97%, and research has found that a mare who has been treated for 5-7 years will self-boost and no longer require additional treatments. Observations on the range shows evidence that some mares even self-boost after only the first year. Like in humans, each mare’s physiology is different.

We state clearly, again, we find none of the research nor data they mention above, available for perusal, in written form.  In another words, what they write and refer to as statistical research data, simply does not exist within research nor data gathered formats. . .

But, we do find a lot of this supposed data in sales brochures, or formatted to appear as research data origination (does not exist truthfully), but is not.  As a matter of fact, and over time, our position in opposition to the use of Pesticide PZP has become enhanced, due to no truthful research data available – but we have articles, such as the aforementioned by AWHC, to make it appear good science involved –

“The only thing we can deduct from so much narrative-only circumstances about the Pesticide PZP, is the issue remains profound.  It is not of science, but of someone’s imagination, and an experimental compound at that, that simply has not been developed thoroughly, by scientific means.  Frankly, it would have been rejected years ago, as dysfunctional entirely, if not for the money-rich HSUS and others making up their own information, to cover their costs of ownership of a Pesticide PZP compound. . .  I remain quite surprised that lawsuits have not developed, due to the dangers it may pose of its use on Public Lands, or in wilderness areas.”  — James Cavanaugh, PhD Biologist, NSA-Retired