Horse News

Heavy Cop Presence at Twin Peaks Keeps Contractor Hiding Place Off Limits

by Steven Long ~ Editor/Publisher of Horseback Magazine

Armed Law Enforcement Out Number 4 Credentialed Reporters at Wild Horse Stampede

A sampling of the vehicles that were protecting the BLM Contractor (Cattoors) from the four members of the press (Your Tax Dollars at Work) ~ Photo by Terry Fitch

TWIN PEAKS, CA (Horseback) – A heavy, armed police presence protected America and the Federal Bureau of Land Management wild horse stampede  contractor from four journalists and no anti-BLM activists at the “gather” held today at Twin Peaks, according to Horseback Magazine’s R.T. Fitch at the site. There were two reporters and a photographer representing the Texas based magazine, as well as a videographer working for the New York Times, a paper which was provided unfettered access earlier this week while other media organizations and citizen observers were kept at bay.

“Why are we being kept away,” the Times photog asked, incredulous that she wasn’t given the same deferential treatment as her colleagues had been afforded earlier in the week before Horseback Online exposed BLM’s media favoritism and attempt spin its story to the powerful national paper.

She was told the captured horses were being held on private land and the landowner had prohibited outsiders from coming on his property, the usual reason BLM has refused access to its trap sites.

Hand on side arm and ready for action against the three female and one male members of the press ~ Photo by Terry Fitch

Fitch reported there were four armed BLM rangers, one armed sheriff, and multiple agency staff members guarding the two horses captured Friday from the intruding press. Chief photographer Terry Fitch took a photograph of the cars of personnel protecting the contractor from the press. The stampede helicopter and its operators have been the subject of intense scrutiny after scores of horses have died at recent “gathers.” The roundup was called off at 9 a.m. because the helicopter from Cattoor Livestock Roundups of Nephi, UT. could find no horses.

Fewer and few wild horses are to be found in the West in the wake of relentless roundups by the federal agency. Critics allege they are clearing the animals from the land for the utilization of special interest groups.

The chief of the BLM’s security detail at Twin Peaks has refused an on the record interview with Horseback regarding the reason for such a heavy police presence being paid for by the American taxpayers when there has never been an apparent threat.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

73 replies »

  1. OMG, I counted EIGHT vehicles in that photo. So the 4 of you press members each have 2 or more people guarding against your inquiries and photography work. Wow, just wow…..

    Somehow someone needs to demand that BLM security answer why it is wasting this kind of money on “security”. If there is a threat, I want to know what exactly that is, in detail. And, as a taxpayer, I think I have the right to know.

    Who should receive the pressure for this question? Is there a name or specific title? Is it federal or state division based or both? They need to be hammered (and then their bosses hammered too) with calls for accountability by the citizens of this country.


    • Looking back I have heard that Sue Cattoor has repeatedly said they have had death threats. I have never heard of an investigation or any advocates being questioned about threats. I think the Cattoors have been the ones to request extra security and BLM said that last winter when asked. mar


      • Here’s my take on the whole “death threats” issue. It’s drama and it’s nonsense, and I suspect Sue makes these allegations simply to get attention. There would be some kind of investigation. As easy as it is to trace calls, etc., the culprit would be caught.
        To add extra security to surround the contractor at the expense of the American taxpayer is ridiculous. If they’re worried, let the Cattoor family hire body guards. Honestly, that’s what the rest of us would have to do.
        So glad that another person from the NYT was there and that she wasn’t given special treatment. That experience may give the paper a completely different take on this whole thing.


      • I agree, NOW, NYT has an article they can sink their teeth BLM spin this to say the overkill cops are there to protect us from mauranding ranchers..I would like to point out there were no conflicts going on behind trees fellas.


  2. I hope the advocates present at the horse raids are also taking down BLM license numbers and getting the names of BLM personnel and the names and contact info of observers. This could be essential if any the BLM was to wrongly interpret a question as a threat and act inappropriately, besides their usual attempts at humiliation and intimidation. Since the BLM is playing our very presence as a national security threat I would suggest to all present to remember to take the time to get the names and contact info of all present and keep carefully documented esp since you never know when these same observers could be called as witnesses to your defense. Careful and accurate recording of all questions along with responses should be noted and kept also. The BLM is calling the plays and they seem to be teetering on the very edge of rationally interpreting personal behaviors. They seem to be itching for a chance to misinterpret a negative verbal response into possible justification of moving to the “next level” Never forget that while we are law abiding and responsible people we are in the control of people who are neither and are far away from witnesses. Record, record, record.


    • I agree. Document everything. Even get photos of the license plates.
      Sorry to say that law enforcement often forgets that they are in the employ of the people, not tools for the government used to harrass citizens. If they cannot be respectful and courteous to the people who pay their salaries, they ought not to be there.


      • Salaries heck! just imagine their donut bill, they must have an onsite bakery at the BLM offices..good to see them getting out in the field for a little exercise! Is there a fitness requirement for these guys? I know for a fact I can out run them..


  3. The Cattoor’s know they have killed America’s horses and they must feel guilty. Once a person feels guilty, they feel paranoid. That is why the Cattoor’s asked for extra security because of their own wrong doing, in this case killing horses, resulting in being paranoid. I think the bible explains it something like this, can’t remember the exact passage: “The guilty man will run when no-one is in pursuit.


  4. Thank you for witnessing for the horses. I have concerns about your safety. You may not want to blog about what any concerns that you have, but I hope that the FBI or some agency with no ties to the local BLM employees and their so called law enforcement are being informed about the stepped-up security measures.

    Also, I’d like to see what kind of death threats Sue Catoor is getting. I hope she is keeping a record of phone calls, emails, letters, etc. This could be just an excuse to keep observers further away from the trap.

    Has anyone questioned the legality of holding the gathers on private land? This should not be the contractors call. He is being paid by the BLM–that means us. If what he is doing is on the up and up, there should be no problem.

    I have boarded my horses at a few different barns and have always had 24/7 access although I did not use it. There is absolutely no reason that the public should not have access to the horses.

    Our state fair has harness racing. When I was a child, several of the horses were injurred and had to be destroyed. My uncle was the track vet, and I knew that he would take care of things humanely. Although this was not done in the open, it was not something shrouded in secrecy either. If you are doing the right thing, even difficult things, you have no reason to hide.

    Maybe we need to try to prevent the trapping and corraling of horses on private lands unless the land owner agrees in writing to allow the public access to the horses. This is just bureacratic obstruction.

    I believe that Steve Long made the point in one of his articles that when the government does the public’s business on privately held land, the public has the right to be on that property. He used the post office analogy. This might be something to get a ruling on.

    It seems to me that the BLM is just upping the ante attempting to intimidate witnesses, journalists, and advocates.

    Maybe we need to see about having an attorney present with the advocates at the gather.

    Thanks to everyone who is working so hard. For my part, I am writing like crazy. Just hope something sticks.


    • Its sticking! and too think this needs to be pursued..stinkingwater gather was held on private security gaurds, no cops, 12 people..only one advocate me..I thought I was considered a threat?????? so much for a bad reputation…
      I have looked at the map with all potential traps sites marked..there are a Gillion of them for TPs…they really had to look to find some private land to put it on..the fact that they only gathered a couple of horses in this a direct contradiction to their statement that they locate these trap sites in relation to the amount of horses close by…gottcha


      • I went back out there on friday to see the horses gathered in the following days and photed and glassed them..none of the mares and foals have been processed yet-except Makendras foal and dam who were processed immediately, and they are kept in a seperate pen, awaiting adoption by the folks who owned the ranch where they were captured..some of the stallions have been tagged and branded but it did not look like they had been gelded.1 brand new foal born..either at the gather site on the 25th or in holding..I went into town to the BLM office to get more information as the pale palamino foal that was run so hard -I could not find-asked about deaths. 1 blind older stallion who had made the run to the gather pens was euthanized there..only recorded death..The WH&B “expert is out of town for a week ..or so..Makendra has been trying to reach him as well, and I spoke to her by phone from the site..I will be asking to be present for the release of the 40 horses to be returned to the HMA and want to photo document each of those horses…frosty reception..purchased a map of complete BLM roads into most of the HMAs in oregon…$8..the gal told me there were no horses so no point in going..I know, i said, is’nt it sad???


      • Oh yes, and one other photograph i took was of 3 private horses, obviously kept there, 2 with fly masks on..eating the wild horse hay purchased with tax dollars..there are usually 6 or so horses up top by the chutes tied and saddled by the chutes..these appear to be residents saddle horses.


      • at this point they have gathered all horses off of stinking water..4 less than the 210..40 horses are to be released back..that was over a week ago when gathered for the first ones and as yet unprocessed..I see different paint marks and numbers on the horses and was told last week those were just marks used to identify numbers in the gather..i am not convinced of that and want more info..i was told last week that they do not-geld the old stallions but release them back, and i was very happy to hear that, as this is their own policy and not what we have been seeing at other holding areas- If there is going to be gathers, this division does far and away the better job of actually caring for the horses..I feel comfortable in saying that..but I also strongly feel that gathers are the wrong way to manage the herds. I have done some research on this division and they have a long history of trying to do the best for the horses given the national policy to be followed…The spider web quality of the fencing on an HMA is out of control and in direct contridiction to it being a wild horse HMA, first and formost..there are other public lands that are not HMAs that could be used for massive cattle grazing..and there are alot of cattle on this small HMA-there is also alot of forage and water sources..and no claims being made by the BLM to that effect..this is strictly an AML situation..210 horses came in as fat and sassy-it was even laughed about by the BLM and they were termed soggy..which means very fat..altho in a week they donot look nearly as good


      • also i want to comment on a post i did on the amount of roans in this herd and the alarm over the lethal gene..In the gather we watched- most of the horses were roan-around 50 to 90..the horses I looked for on friday were the ones gathered in following my relief..many of those were bays and browns with a smattering of roan foals, and a few roan mares and obviously from the foals-there were roan stallions in those herds from other areas of the HMAs..The concentration of HMA horses in the Lamb ranch was heavy with roans


  5. I don’t believe they are allow to take over pirate lands as a method to keep observers out and violating the 1 amendment. The government can not come over to my property and take it over to plant beans, have a picnic or to trap horses. This would need to be a matter for a lawyer and the goverment seizing private property thereby eliminating Humane observers.. The constitution states that prives citizens do not to harbor government citizens in their home and land. Some one needs to read the constitution like an attorney and see if the government can even do this. It would certainly possible solve one question.


    • Sorry about all the typo’s. I should of gone to bed, it was 2:30 in the A.M. and I guess I didn’t convey my thoughts well.

      I believe if the government is using private taxpayers land they would have to pay a fee to the private citizen. If the government pays the fee than the land is leased under the government and the government would have to abide by the laws which include reporters and observers. They do not have a right to stifle freedom of the press. I know I am not explaining this well. For instance, if the police needed my land to catch rabbits, they could not just come on my land and catch rabbits because they wanted to. A contract would be written and I would have the right to appeal if I didn’t agree to let the police catch rabbits on my property. I would also have to compensated for allowing the police to catch rabbits including any liability that occured while the police were catching rabbits. I think maybe someone can explain this better than I can.

      For instance, I owned five acres on a river bank. The police decided that they could drive across my five acres to monitor the river bank looking for people in canoes smoking pot I guess. They were ruining my grass and running over expensive trees I had planted. I finally told them, they could walk or drive across my property in an emergency situation, but all damage would have to paid for. They decided they could sit in a canoe themselves and monitor the river. In other words, the government can not use private land unless the owner is compensated and in this situation with gathering wild horses they would have to allow observers on private land. Once the government leases the land or rents the land it is government taxpayer funds and the liability belongs to the government, not the private owner.

      I like pirates as well, but it was another typo. Although, the BLM is acting like they are pirates.


      • Debra..great find! this needs to be a blog story in and of itself as we explore the possibilitys of a rico case as it could apply to 1st amendment rights…we are overloaded with intimidation, and threats of retribution against horses and people..this may have legs and certainly tells the tale of a government agency out of control on many levels..This and the other cases should be logged into an evidence file to cite in Lauras first amendment case, as it goes to proving a pattern of behavior and previous “bad acts”-add to this..the “alternative management options” document and you see the pattern of this behavior of deception and fraud toward the american taxpayer develope


    • Here is an article I found. Private Property Protected From Bureau of Land Management Employee Retaliation

      On Jan. 11, 2006, the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that employees in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) cannot retaliate against a ranch owner for refusing to grant the agency a right-of-way across his private land. In its ruling, the Court found that (1) an individual has the right to be free from retaliation when exercising a Fifth Amendment property right, and (2) the right to exclude someone from using private property includes the right to exclude the federal government. Robbins v. Wilkie, No. 04-8016 (January 11, 2006).

      The Plaintiff in the case, Harvey Frank Robbins, filed suit against employees in the Worland, Wyo. BLM office pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. RICO is usually used against organized crime. However, in this case, RICO is being used against BLM employees who Robbins said attempted to use the power of the federal regulations to extort a right-of-way across his private land in Wyoming. Robbins refused to grant the BLM an easement and so certain BLM employees retaliated against him by cancelling his grazing privileges and permits, his right-of way across federal land and his special use permits, as well as bringing unfounded criminal charges against him.

      One past BLM employee boasted that some of the other BLM employees said they would “bury Frank Robbins.” They then trespassed on his private property and even broke into his private lodge, Robbins stated in his pleadings. To protect his civil liberties, Robbins hired the Budd-Falen Law Offices in Cheyenne, Wyo. and filed suit against the BLM’s employees.

      “I have been representing Frank for 12 years,” Karen Budd-Falen explained. “Initially when I met Frank, I just assumed that we were only dealing with livestock trespass charges. It took several years to realize that the BLM was just using those trespass charges to try to get Frank to give up his property rights. We filed this complaint 7 years ago, based upon that realization. Since I have been representing Frank, the BLM has filed 18 individual adverse decisions against him.”

      The government has fought Robbins’ claims on various grounds, including arguing that “there was not a clearly established constitutional right to exclude others from one’s property, and that they could not be held liable under RICO for actions authorized by BLM regulations because those actions are not ‘wrongful.’” However, the Tenth Circuit Court disagreed. “A property owner’s right to exclude extends to private individuals as well as the government,” the Court said. “Defendants’ assertion that BLM could have taken Robbins’ property for public use after providing the just compensation is correct. BLM, however, did not exercise or attempt to exercise eminent domain power in this case,” the Court explained. “Instead, Robbins alleges, Defendants attempted to extort a right-of-way to avoid the requirement of just compensation. If the right to exclude means anything, it must include the right to prevent the government from gaining an ownership interest in one’s property outside the procedures of the Takings Clause.”

      In a refusal to let the government stretch its regulatory role beyond constitutional limits protecting civil liberties, the Court used strong language upholding private property rights. The Court emphasized that a government agency, such as the BLM, is not above the law. “If we permit government officials to retaliate against citizens who choose to exercise this right [to exclude others from private property], citizens will be less likely to exclude the government, and government officials will be more inclined to obtain private property by means outside the Takings Clause. The constitutional right to just compensation, in turn, would become meaningless,” the Court explained. “Because retaliation tends to chill citizens’ exercise of their Fifth Amendment right to exclude the government from using their private property, the Fifth Amendment prohibits such retaliation as a means of ensuring that the right is meaningful.”

      Additionally the Court ruled that federal agency employees could not hide behind the power of their offices to avoid Robbins’ case. The Court stated that even if the actions taken by the individual employees were lawful, if they were done for an improper motive, Robbins could maintain his case. The Court stated, “Nevertheless, we conclude that if Defendants engaged in lawful actions with an intent to extort a right-of-way from Robbins rather an intent to merely carry out their regulatory duties, their conduct is actionable under RICO.”

      The case will now go to a jury trial in Cheyenne, Wyo. The jury will examine the facts and determine whether the BLM employees used their power as BLM officials to retaliate against Robbins when he would not give them access to his private property.

      “This (jury trial) is where we wanted to get all along,” Budd-Falen said. “It has been years of legal maneuvering to stop us from getting to a jury.”

      “We will be able to present live witnesses to testify about the harassment and live witnesses to testify about the economic damages that Frank has incurred,” Budd-Falen continued. “We have a BLM employee who has testified under oath, twice, that certain employees were out to get Frank Robbins. He took early retirement stating he was tired of playing that game.”

      Since the original lawsuit was filed seven years ago, there have been four other related RICO decisions based on the Robbins case. “These decisions have given us what we needed in a complaint to beat a motion to dismiss and get the BLM employees to testify.”

      According to Budd-Falen, the impact of this decision will be case specific. “There will not always be a RICO charge in all cases,” She explained. “You have to have the bottom-line motive, not just adverse decisions.”

      “This case will certainly make it a lot easier for the next person,” She continued. “Frank has incurred a lot more difficulty and expense because we did not have a roadmap. Now we do.”

      “This latest decision by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has very powerful language protecting private property,” Budd-Falen said. “We are glad to finally get to a jury trial.”

      Back to:


      • Wow, we need that judge in our fight. It is wonderful to hear of someone actually standing up to the BLM.


  6. Send these armed guards to the border where they are needed. There are real threats there. Our borders are wide open and that is a threat to national security. Drug cartels are targeting law enforcement. There are better and more important things for them to do than to obstruct the freedom of the the press and intimidate taxpaying citizens.


    • Can you just imagine the slack jawed look on their face when that announcement is made…But…but…but…they shoot back down there..


  7. Great photos, Terry!!! Thanks for getting these really great shots. Hummm, on the subject of shots, it must have been a scary standoff….Nikon and Canon vs. Glock and .45. Give me a break.


    • You would think the BLM security guards, fingering the guns on their hips, would be embarrassed to be out there when there is REAL work to be done elsewhere! Guns v Cameras story at 11:00!


  8. I must say RT..a big thumbs up to the camo outfit..sans thong??? And will look for a camo hat as well-rounds out the look…see what happens when you wear camo to a roundup..the fashion police show up to bust you….


    • that was a trip..suprised Sue didn’t say the palamino mares gps wasn’t working and thats why she went off the cliff..the only reason she didn’t use that…guess someone pulled out the duct tape before she could get to that one….


  9. I’ll say it again (much like the no-fly crap), they CANNOT say they won’t let you in because it’s done on private land. An agreement was made with the so-called private landowner and BLM can run the show. Anybody ever read the “private land owner trap site” agreement? Seriously…ANYBODY???????

    They are such cowards and equine bullies, they even pass the “no access” fault on a private citizen for their disgusting behavior. Wonder what perks or bullying that soul had to go through with the TP and previous fiascos?????



  10. Maybe the NYT will finally catch on that the abuse of power and the level of corruption has no boundaries within this ill agency who would order the SEALS if they wanted to to prove just that: that they are a bunch of wanna show you we are in charge maniacs, when they in fact know what they are doing is wrong and highly criticized yet they blow all out of proportion as they are so accustomed to do already. When it serves them, anything is right. Sabotaging our rights, play dumbfounded and use excuses to carry out their grotesque agenda – Kings of manipulation and lies – what are they so afraid of ? Clearly their actions call for mobilizing an army unit, it’s just that the target is not chosen wisely !!!


  11. Watch how they brought the ranchers out, and then hid. That has been the agenda all along. Get two factions going against each other. The ranchers and the advocates have every reason to stand together. They are now finding that out in Nevada.


    • That strategy is sooooo 1880’s like the sheepman, cattlemen and farmers all slitting each others throats back then.

      That’s what the wild equine killers think works in 2010???? That’s what the high priced PR firm thinks works about this specific issue???

      Good lordy…what idiots and to think my taxpayer dollars for for all this sh*t!


      • Always refer back to the help wanted ad for BLM..”no special skills or experience required” here we see the results of that…


    • LOL…I think you are right!..I hope Laura explained to them..she had to sue for the right to observe the roundup at all, and her suit resulted in them (NYT) being able to be there at all, as the gather sites fall under the “area 51” rule…top secret …aliens at not disturb


  12. I really don’t think it is a bad idea to talk with the ACLU. After all, the first amendment rights are being violated and violation of the first amendment right is a hugh violation. In addition, the horses are protected under law which is being violated. The violation is causing a civil violation. The removal of our horses is Organized Crime since they are protected. It is no less harmful than if the BLM were to destroy that spotted owl on public land.

    I really don’t see any harm in talking with the ACLU. I am willing to go and fly to their offices with anyone who is able to convey to the ACLU in a clear manner. I can go for emotional support, however someone else should give the ACLU a clearer picture. For instance, I have been trying to teach my little poodle to sit for eight years and somehow she thinks it means to jump as high as possible. Therefore, I will be happy to provide emotional support.


    • Yep, this is still a good move as they will advise anyone who calls and tell you the bottom line. You have the right ideas there, Debra. ACLU is in every state and in the phone book. Call and talk. Anyone. Anywhere. No need to fly anywhere. But get the particulars on the timing. That is crucial. They will explain you have only so much time from the date of the ‘incident’ to getting a case together with them. Ask questions now and know what to do when the time comes. mar


    • I had intended to contact the ACLU and ask for a representative to be present when I attended TP to observe first hand the restrait intimidation and overuse of security to attending observers. And do think it is an excellent idea as well as all you stated above


  13. One thing for certain’s going on – in spite of all the PR – overall the BLM appear like thugs!

    In today’s Nevada Appeal, the BLM has commissioned the National Academy of Science to investigate the “science” used by the WH&B program to make certain they are using best methods. And all this time I thought the 54 Congressmen had required the BLM take this tack, ha-ha! It’s fun to read BLM news daily and catch them spinning the public, but sad fact for them is it’s not working. There have been too many deaths associated with DOI – in the gulf – Mojave desert. And now they have HSUS, ASPCA and too many horse groups to mention on point.

    Thanks for the update on Stinkingwater – good to know there’s at least one group working for BLM who are trying to do the right thing! I’m glad you were there!


  14. IS there any reason that the BLM would use private land for a round-up other than to intimidate and otherwise try to prevent the humane observers from viewing and reporting the round-up itself thereby preventing freedom of speech and press? Has anyone ever talked with the private land users themselves? Did the BLM use intimidation tactics on the private land users? How much of taxpayers money is used to secure the private land users land for the purpose of a round up? Do the private land users have a contract with BLM?

    Is the BLM allowed to zero out herds that are protected.


  15. How’s this one for BLM ethics and improper/illegal behavior? It’s an article about a former BLM manager improperly accepting “gifts” that broke recently in the Farmington Daily Times. I was going to put it up then, but now I’m glad I didn’t. To think the “chicken hawks” may have finally come home to roost in San Juan County, NM, WHERE I LIVE!!!

    This guy’s plans began to unravel after the announcement that, after nine years managing the BLM’s Farmington field office, he had resigned in May to accept a job as president of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association. The O&G folks really wanted him. Can’t imagine why!

    This is today’s FDT pickup from the Albuquerque Journal. Note the LENGTH and DETAIL.

    This is the MUCH shorter article (an understatement if I’ve ever made one!) AP published for pickup. Notice any difference in information and TONE?

    The whole story = another submission to the NYT? ‘nuf said!


    • yes and as a follow up, Bob Abbey want more etics guidlines..who needs a guideline for criminal activity??
      ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) – Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey wants agency officials to strengthen their ethics training programs so employees can avoid potential and actual conflicts of interest.

      A team of BLM employees has been working on a set of recommendations for the past year, and Abbey announced in a memo sent out this week to state directors that he has accepted the team’s recommendations.

      The agency plans to bolster the role of its ethics counselors nationwide.

      Abbey’s memo comes just days after it was revealed through a federal investigation that a former BLM manager in New Mexico who oversaw 1 of the nation’s largest onshore mineral production areas had taken gifts from an oil company and misused travel funds.

      Abbey says he wants to ensure all employees have access to ethics guidelines and training.


  16. Marilyn, I agree with you. We do need help researching this and then putting it a package for the ACLU. I think most of any discussion regarding this should be off-line. We need to brainstorm together. I think they are doing all this because they are very good at bluffing, just like the “No fly zone.”

    Every government agency has checks and balances. What kind of penalty can the BLM receive for violating the federal law? How is that law inforced? Who inforces it? What are checks and balances?



      This is a supreme court decision under Bush which dis allows a citizen or group to sue the BLM for its decisions in how it manages the land…however as in all law there are ways and means around WWP is suing the BLM over their decison making process on RMPs(28 of them) so we should be watching for this.


  17. Sandra, About the Roan gene
    “we wish to express our gratitude to Rebecca Overton, author, for graciously allowing us to post her article here on in its complete original form. This article introduces the UC Davis study that has now proven the roan gene is not lethal. As of 2009, the UC Davis study has now shown that the roan gene can be tested for.”

    From the Hancock (QH) site


    • The roan and gray gene are dominant genes, meaning if a horse appears roan he carries the genes, a non roan horse even with 2 roan parents, does not carry the gene and cannot produce a roan..doesn’t need to be tested for..your eyes tell you if the gene is there..2 roan horses bred have a 1 out of 3 chance of producing a lethal, double gened roan foal -if both parents contribute the roan gene…if there was testing, it would not help the wild horse herds as breeding is not done selectively.


    • looked this up on UC Davis website:
      Roan Zygosity Testing

      Roan is inherited as a dominant gene but the specific mutation has not yet been identified, so there is no direct test for the gene. VGL has identified DNA markers in Quarter Horses and Paints associated with Roan that can be used to determine if a horse has the roan gene and how many copies. The following additional materials should be included to provide a complete analysis:


      Hair sample from at least one parent
      Color photo of the subject horse, labeled with the horse’s name
      Three generation pedigree with color and patterns listed

      the only definitive statement made was that roan in a homozygous state is not lethal, not every roan foal born from 2 roan parents is homozygous, there are roan foals born from 2 roan parents that have obviously not inherited the lethal gene..those that do, lose the fetus early on, which has been noted by some long time breeders..they just rebreed the mares on their next cycle..In another post I commented on the fact that there were a significant amount of foals born late in this group of mares, which may be a sign that this is researcher has been able to discount that a lethal gene tied to the roan coat exists.. I have found breeders tend to be a reliable source when they are being honest and not trying to hide a perceived problem as they spend years observing this in their breeding stock.


      • So if the roan gene has only been studied under controlled breeding conditions, it could and likely would contribute to attrition in the wild herds, along with other things (natural and accidental death, disease, predation, etc.) that the BLM doesn’t seem to take into account in its 20% (25%?). I wonder if these fatalities might be a factor in the difference between the BLM percentages and the NIS(?) 15%. If not, the NIS number should be even lower.


      • Exactly Linda, I made this point at the holding facility after the roundup to the staff..Tara suggested i should have commented on that in the EA, I said at the time I submitted my comments I was unaware of the concentation of roan horses, or i would have..and suggest that they allow for that possibility when the figure the birth rates. This Hma has had pretty good documentation on it…in 1971, the count was 170 -180 horses..about what they counted this spring and figured 210 with births due..this herd was gathered in 1995 for the first time and taken to 40 horses..prior to that gather birth rates ran from around 7% to 15%, after the gather birth rates went to that actual or from the use of computer modeling..I do not know..but historically their birth rates were alot lower..and I counted 11 foals from that first days gather of between 60 and 90 most of these are big horses, not small-and were very fat…there is no problem with the land supporting the 180 that were there on that approx 80,000 acres..this idea that some day somewhere there will be a shortage..should be played to the theme song of “somewhere over the rainbow”..We do not remove either wildlife or cattle based on this unscientific assumtion.


  18. Many armed guards protecting a convicted criminal still committing crimes: “The Defendant is convicted of the offense(s) of: Use of Aircraft to Hunt Wild Horses in violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 47 and Aiding and Abetting in violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 2. It Is The Judgment Of This Court That: Defendant is fined in the amount of $500.00 and a Special Assessment Fee of $10.00, payable immediately. Defendant is placed on supervised probation for a period of one year with a special condition that defendant shall not commit any offenses in violation of Bureau of Land Management Law. Entered and Served May 27, 1992 Clerk U.S. District Court District of Nevada


    • Good question Anna, I’d like to know that, too. Was there a problem with that particular watering hole? Anybody know?


  19. Start suing the private landowners for blocking the American people’s first amendment rights and they may soon start passing the on the Cattoor and BLM kickbacks to hold these private affairs with public taxdollars and public wild horses. Whoever thought up the plan to hold these roundups on private lands must have gotten a big promotion and raise. Time to start peeling back these BLM tactics one by one.


  20. Great news.Glad the police are there to protect the ny times journalist and all the others.Let the truth be told.LET FREEDOM RING soon for our american horses the mustangs and burros.Why didnt they have the police protection all along?seems to help.Keep on fighitng for the mustangs.
    Kathleen Hofferty
    Ipswich Equine Rescue Corp


  21. The BLM was given 305 million dollars from the Obama’s stimulus plan. I went through the BLM website to see how they are spending it. It didn’t mention one word about the BLM and our wild horses. The site talks about protecting Big Horn Sheep, birds, frogs, trout, water streams and allowing grazing. However, not one word on wild horses. In other words, there is no plan for wild horses at all except gather All of them.


    • well, they are using that money to hire 194 new employees to do laundry clean toliets drive trucks and conduct real estate transactions….but can’t hire another vet to see to the welfare of horses in holding. the more that die- the better their bottom line looks and more petty cash for donuts, and security for their insecurity.


  22. Thanks for keeping us updated R.T. And, on it goes, the saga of the wild, American mustang tragedy! The American government’s self-declared war on it’s very own symbol of freedom & the American spirit, on whose back our country was settled! Those idiotic BLM COWARDS….needing all those stupid cops to protect them? From what, or who? A few journalists just trying to do their jobs, trying to bring the truth to America, come on! This is almost as bad as having a socialist, communistic government! Why even bother to hold public elections, they really don’t care what we think or want. To spend all that money to pay for all those “body guards”, ready to shoot innocent people, because we care about our wild horses!! And, to think, we can’t stop them, whether we abide by the laws, & try to do things peacefully, or, want to take matters into our own hands (or, DO we?? NOT!!). I am so sorry if I offended anyone, but, what exactly ARE “we” really “doing”?? Why can’t America stop this insanity? P.S. To Kathleen Hofferty, the police were not there to protect the wild mustangs, they were to protect the BLM & their round up contractors.


  23. Lets see our federal gov spent about 10,000 on one day of “security” so the general public can’t see what the contractor we pay for with our taxes are DOING?

    AND HOW MUCH IS A 24/7 WEBCAM SYSTEM BLM?? so the general public can watch? The FEDs have a program where they put the cameras in FOR YOU.

    Its like the keystone cops and would be funny if they wern’t abusing animals.

    They have NO EXCUSE for not having live streaming VID on all BLM facilities and contractors!!


Care to make a comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.