Horse News

After Wild Horse Report, Jewell Faces First Moment of Truth at Interior

Source: as published in The Atlantic

“Current practice of removing free-ranging horses from public lands promotes a high population growth rate,” the report concluded

In his February speech nominating her for the position of Secretary of the Interior, President Obama noted that Sally Jewell’s aptitude test in high school “showed she had a knack for mechanical reasoning and spatial ability.” The line drew a laugh — it’s unclear exactly why — but Jewell’s scientific aptitude, and her subsequent experience both as a mechanical engineer and as a successful business executive, surely will help her absorb the evidentiary magnitude of a long-awaited report about the nation’s wild horses released Wednesday by the National Academy of Sciences.

Congenially titled “Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program,” the long and detailed document, the result of nearly two years worth of investigation and research, chronicles the many ways in which the Bureau of Land Management — Secretary Jewell’s Bureau of Land Management — has failed to prudently manage the thousands of federally protected wild horses in its care. The BLM itself sought the NAS review. It succeeded in limiting the scope of it. It was accused of trying to stack the deck of contributors to it. But none of this mattered in the end. Bad science is still bad science, especially to good scientists.

Wild horse advocates and ranchers will differ upon what the Report’s conclusions mean. But there can be no disagreement over what the document means to Jewell. Last month, she told the Denver Post that she was waiting for the Report to be published before she determined BLM policy over the horses. Now she finds herself caught squarely between science and politics. If she is true to the former she will anger an important political constituency — ranchers. And if she is true to the latter she will be shunning a life philosophy that has prioritized scientific rigor. Just a few months into her term, she’s already reached a critical juncture.

What Was in the NAS Report

At the heart of the current debate over the nation’s wild horses is the BLM policy (encouraged and enhanced by Jewell’s predecessor Ken Salazar) of removing horses from their native rangelands out West and warehousing them in enclosures in the Midwest. Tens of thousands of wild horses now are so kept, at great taxpayer expense, while federal officials figure out what to do with them. For years, the BLM has justified these removals, many of which are dangerous to the horses, by claiming they are necessary to protect grazing lands for “multiple uses,” which really means livestock grazing and energy exploration.

The NAS Report took a dim view of the science behind this policy. The BLM’s “current practice of removing free-ranging horses from public lands promotes a high population growth rate,” the report concluded, “and maintaining them in long-term holding facilities is both economically unsustainable and incongruent with public expectations.” In other words, the scientists found that by removing so many wild horses from our lands the Interior Department was doing the opposite of what it was trying to do — decreasing population rates among the herds — and doing it without adequate scientific reason.

The report also was critical of the manner in which the BLM counts, or tries to count, the number of wild horses on the range. And, importantly, it was critical of the way in which federal administrators evaluate the different impacts of different grazing animals upon the millions of acres in play here. Even though the BLM limited the scope of the NAS review to exclude an in-depth evaluation of the impact of sheep and cattle on these lands — the livestock outnumbers the wild horses in these places by orders of magnitude — the NAS acknowledged that such an evaluation was scientifically required. Here’s the essence of the report:

The Wild Horse and Burro Program has not used scientifically rigorous methods to estimate the population sizes of horses and burros, to model the effects of management actions on the animals, or to assess the availability and use of forage on rangelands. Evidence suggests that horse populations are growing by 15 to 20 percent each year, a level that is unsustainable for maintaining healthy horse populations as well as healthy ecosystems.

Promising fertility-control methods are available to help limit this population growth, however. In addition, science-based methods exist for improving population estimates, predicting the effects of management practices in order to maintain genetically diverse, healthy populations, and estimating the productivity of rangelands. Greater transparency in how science-based methods are used to inform management decisions may help increase public confidence in the Wild Horse and Burro Program.

 

It is hard to read the report, and I read a lot of it, without concluding that the the Academy’s writers were trying to be as polite as possible — the diplomatic language of intra-government dialogue — while blistering the BLM for its policies, practices, and management style. But you need only read the sub-headlines in the report summary to understand how little the scientists think of the way the BLM has conducted its business. The Bureau often says that it is simply doing things “by the book.” But today even “the book” is suspect. The BLM’s “Wild Horses and Burros Management handbook lacks specificity,” the NAS report concludes.

What Was Not in the ReportEven a report of this scope is likely to be incomplete, and there are significant questions and areas of concern surrounding the horses that were left out of the NAS’s work. In addition to the report’s silence on the impact of livestock on public lands, for example, there was no analysis or critique of the BLM’s current practice of aggressively rounding up the horses, an event which is routinely cruel and inhumane. There are other, less drastic ways of accomplishing these gathers, ways the BLM has repeatedly rejected. The Bureau is likely to do so again in the absence of clear direction from the NAS.

Nor was there any discussion of the value of reintroducing back onto public lands some of the horses recently captured by the BLM. If, as the Academy indicated, the horses can be safely controlled by infertility methods, if they eventually self-limit their herd populations anyway, and if tens of millions of taxpayer dollars could be saved by returning some of these horses back onto the range, what exactly is the downside? Evidently, to the scientists, that was the sort of “policy matter” they sought to avoid. But given the costs of keeping these horses penned, and after this Report, the Interior Department can no longer avoid that question.

Perhaps the most glaring omission from the Report was the NAS’s failure to address in any great detail the BLM’s abject failure to abide by the recommendations of scientists 30 years ago — in 1982 — when they issued a similar report about the Bureau’s failure to base its policy choices upon hard science. At that time, for example, the NSA concluded that: “Forage use by wild equids remains a small fraction of the total forage use by domestic animals on western public ranges, regardless of whether the actual number of equids is in accord with the censuses or somewhat higher.” The BLM has ignored that conclusion for decades.

The Reaction

In late 2011, wild horse advocates already were talking in reverential tones about the report, already fearful that the NAS would simply rubber-stamp the BLM’s policies. There were fears that the working group had been stacked by anti-horse, pro-slaughter advocates. Even last week, wild horse advocates expressed concern that the NAS report might recommend the slaughter of the tens of thousands of horses the BLM has rounded up. These fears turned out to be unfounded. So the wild horse crowd toggled Tuesday and Wednesday between being cautiously optimistic and proudly vindicated.

Ginger Kathrens, of the Cloud Foundation, a prominent wild horse advocacy group, was particularly pleased that the NAS supported more “genetic monitoring and tracking the health of herds” and welcomed the Academy’s recommendations that the BLM be more responsive to public views about wild horse policy. “This is a common sense recommendation,” Kathrens told me Thursday. “There are a few offices that are moving toward this open collaboration with the public and we certainly support these offices and look for more to follow suit.” Anything to undermine what some horse advocates call the “cowboy culture” at the BLM.

The Bureau itself was cautious in its reaction to the report. It did not directly acknowledge the many criticisms offered by the NAS. Instead, it offered a few platitudes and made no promises about any of the material suggestions contained in the report. “We commend the National Academy of Sciences for their diligent work on this complex issue,” said Neil Kornze, BLM Principal Deputy Director. “The BLM looks forward to reviewing the report in detail and building on the report’s findings and recommendations to meet the formidable challenges facing the agency in managing wild horses and burros.”

Finally, the ranchers. A man who answered the telephone Thursday at the offices of the Rock Springs Grazing Association, a Wyoming organization dedicated to preserving rangelands for livestock, said the organization had no formal reaction to the report but was planning to “study the study” to determine how it would later react. The Grazing Association has been the principal private catalyst in ridding the public and private lands of southern Wyoming of tens of thousands of wild horses. Those livestock folks aren’t likely to think much of what the scientists have concluded about BLM policies which implement those removal goals…(CONTINUED)

Click (HERE) to read the rest of the story and to comment at The Atlantic

15 replies »

  1. In WY its the politics that over rule common sense with those folk especially in Sue Wallis back yard. She’s having a fit on this one folk’s. In reality this area has to be over hauled to benefit both horses and Cattle and Wallis will have to deal with it. Science is knowledge and if she cant understand the language then she needs to be educated about it along with the rest of the cowboy’s who refuse to retain new information and make changes because of it. Its their livelyhood at stake here( no pun intended) either you adapt or fail.

    Like

  2. This is a really wonderful report Mr. Cohen, you say it like it is with no white wash, it is the truth… Thank You…. We will have to wait and see what Jewell does…. Can’t imagine her not changing BLM’s policy’s I really can’t…… We shall see????????

    Like

  3. It would also be wise for any Secretary of the Interior to be a student of history.

    http://www.mc.cc.md.us/Departments/hpolscrv/jzeck.html

    THE TEAPOT DOME SCANDAL

    The corruption and scandal concerning the oil industry which plagued the Harding administration during the early twenties is remembered today solely as the Teapot Dome Scandal. Teapot Dome, a rather implicating charade that involved the Secretary of the Interior and the oil industry was one of the first major scandals of modern day presidency’s, and served as an example for the press to vent steam against their government.

    Results of the Scandal: The Teapot Dome scandal was a victory for neither political party in the 1920’s, it did become a malor issue in the presidential election of 1924 but neither party could claim full credit for divulging the wrongdoing. The concentrated attention on the scandal made it the first true symbol of government corruption in America. The scandal did reveal the problem of natural resource scarcity and the need to protect for the future against the depletion of resources in a time of emergency. Calvin Coolidge, who assumed the presidency after Harding’s death, handled the problem very systematically and his administration avoided any damage to their reputation. Overall the Teapot Dome scandal came to represent the corruption of American politics which has become more prevelant over the decades since the scandal.

    Like

  4. Since the report has determined that 50,000 horses in holding pens is unacceptable to the American people, the price is too great and it increases the size of the wild herds and is bad policy, THEN we should conclude that turning them loose is the best science. Nature knows best. Truly the word FREEDOM couldn’t be better served.

    Like

  5. I’d run across the Washington, DC mall naked just to talk to Andrew Cohen….if DOI Park Police don’t stop me. 😉

    This guy is a superb journalist and legal mind.

    Jewell will be a toadie….but maybe somebody from the White House will tell her to shape up. I’m not confident that will happen because energy money TALKS louder than truth and justice.

    Like

  6. This REPORT should strike terror into the hearts of the BLM< So many years , of WRONG WRONG WRONG , they should also feel like the imbeciles they truly are,How do you right this wrong , GET RID OF THE REAL PESTS THE BLM< START OVER WITH clear thinking genuine people who have a true love of the Mustangs !!!! AND MOST of ALLL RETURN OUR Magnificent Mustangs back to where they belong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  7. Thank you Andrew Cohen for providing such a great report on a very serious issue! The facts and truth are apparent, so let’s hope they will be transparent and responsible in their decision to do right by the American people and for the future of our wild horses and burros. Truly, the roundups should have never been implemented to begin with and it’s time to release them back into the wild, where they belong! Those that have been removed away from everything that is natural and important to them is unconscionable and it’s time to right the wrong! I sincerely hope that wisdom prevails, because if it doesn’t, everyone and everything will eventually lose, in the long run….nature will see to that.

    Like

  8. Excellent article Mr. Cohen !

    This article should be published in every rag in the country, and then some

    Thank you !!!

    Like

  9. New BLM head, Jewell, will have to rely on her scientific background to do the right thing for the wild horses despite the tremendous political pressure from ranchers and other exploiters of government lands. The BLM will fight hard to continue the roundups as that is their, dare I say it, Cash Cow.

    Like

  10. Part of the history of the BLM is that it started out of the Grazing Rights Program, for ranchers. Time has evolved and so should the Grazing Rights program. No longer grandfather in ranches. Gas is no longer under $1/gallon so why should the grazers get to run their cattle for $1.35 per month/cow & calf pair. I’d like to be able to run my livestock on public lands for that price. They should at least try charging $135 per month. See how many ranchers would actually pay that. I think NADA and that’s still a good deal.

    Like

  11. . http://wildhorsepreservation.org/media/feds-sign-6m-helicopter-contract-wild-horse-and-burro

    FEDS SIGN $6M HELICOPTER CONTRACT FOR ‘WILD HORSE AND BURRO’

    Posted on April 2, 2013 at 4:2 PM
    By Jeryl Bier, The Weekly Standard

    As the sequester bore down on Washington, the dire warnings from the Obama administration gave the impression that wild horses couldn’t drag another dime out of the treasury for a whole host of vital government services. Aircraft carrier refueling, the Head Start program, and White House tours were among the high profile victims.
    However, as it turned out, wild horses, with a little help from burros, managed to drag $6,000,000 out of the taxpayers’ wallets for Helicopter Flight Services two weeks after the sequester went into effect. The same government website that posted the contracts for Vice President Biden’s London and Paris hotel costs and Paris limo costs has the details:
    Related documents show that the purpose of the contract is to provide on call helicopter flight services to support transportation of personnel and/or cargo in support of natural resource missions along with other administrative and related activities as directed by the Government in support of the “Wild Horse and Burro” (WHB).
    When asked for clarification on the contract, Joshua Carter of the Interior Department replied via email:
    The contract awarded to Skyhawk Helicopter Services is an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity type contract, which means that while the Government knows they will need these services at some point over the course of the next year, we don’t know exactly when we’ll need them nor do we know exactly how much of the service. Actual services will be ordered via the issuance of task orders for specific amounts and timeframe. The $6M figure is the contract ceiling meaning that the total of all orders issued over the life of the contract will not exceed $6M. So while the contract is considered a $6M contract, the likelihood of the actual workload reaching that amount is minimal.
    According to a Bureau of Land Management budget document, a total of $76,758,000 was included for the National Wild Horse and Burro Program in the Fiscal Year 2012 continuing resolution passed by Congress and signed by the president.
    Days after the sequester took effect, a two-day Wild Horse & Burro Advisory Board Meeting was held at the Sheraton Oklahoma City Hotel in Oklahoma and included discussions on population growth suppression, ecotourism, and herd area repopulation.
    Originally Posted By The Weekly Standard

    Like

Care to make a comment?

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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.