Stone Cabin

At ground zero for the Wild Horse and Burro Program lie three metrics that create a baseline for everything that occurs: Appropriate Management Level (AML), forage allocation and the (odd) boundary lines that set the acreage where wild horses and burros could legally stand.

Many people make an assumption that these three critical metrics were carefully set using some scientific method or another… and that is simply not the case. Even the concept of limiting the range where wild horses and burros could be managed was a political construct created in order to pass the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act in debate in Congress.

Background

Both the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and United States Forest Service (USFS) were placed under intense pressure when the law passed and they were tasked with management of wild horses and burros.

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 had aimed to prevent overgrazing and soil deterioration on public rangelands after the Dust Bowl. It led to the creation of grazing districts and a permit system for livestock grazing on federal lands by the U.S. Grazing Service (the precursor of the BLM), effectively ending the era of open-range grazing and creating deep resentment with “federal interference.” It is estimated that at the time of the Taylor Grazing Act there was as many as 150,000 wild horses in areas that later fell under the purview of federal legislation to protect them. After the Taylor Grazing Act, the Grazing Service was essentially a partner in removing wild horses until, in 1946, when the General Land Office and the U.S. Grazing Service were merged into the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

By the 1950s, the population of wild horses had been reduced to about 25,000. The practice of Mustanging, running horses down with planes and trucks (made infamous in the film “The Misfits”), was a fast cash option that was brutally pushing free-roaming horses in the West into the pages of history.

How the frame was set

Absurdly, the “number the land could sustain” was set at the same number that represented what Congress found “fast disappearing” from the landscape. There was no thought given to what a “recovery” number would be. No thought given to protection of resources like forage or water necessary to achieve a number of wild horses that would represent a recovery of herds.

Instead, the number allowed on the range became political placation. Agreements were made with livestock permittees that reflected how many were in each grazing allotment and how many would the permittee tolerate. BLM field offices did their best to appease ranchers (who were still angry about the laws that allowed the federal government to oversee livestock operations) by creating boundary lines that excluded the best grazing lands, limiting numbers to what was declared “fast-disappearing,” and basically allowing mustanging to continue for another 5 years through the “claiming period” where anyone could claim a horse or burro on public lands and call it their property, without any proof.

The target number BLM is trying to achieve is less than were found as the Act passed.

Today

What we see today is a further manipulation of “numbers the range can sustain” and absolutely no attempt to protect resources for wild horse and burro use.

In 1971, free-roaming horses were “found” on 53.8 million acres of federal land, designated as Herd Areas (HA). Around 1976, BLM decided that they would only manage wild horses and burros on 31.6. They called these new areas “Herd Management Areas,” HMAs. This was all done without any public input. Over the next 20 years BLM would cut additional acreage to the 26.9 million acres they “manage” for wild horse and burro use today.

15.6 million acres of HMA land is in Nevada (NV) alone, more than half of all wild horses and burros in the nation. The reason for the larger proportion reflects the large percentage of land in NV  that is public lands and lands that were “not prized” for productivity as NV is the most arid state in the nation. That leaves about 12 million acres divided up in the other 9 western states that were said to have wild horses and burros. States like Idaho removed horses from much of the landscape during the claiming period and only 418,268 acres with a maximum set population for horses of 617 stands today for the entire state as “appropriate.”

One place where the “management through agreements and not science” is evident is Stone Cabin/Saulsbury (and the Forest Service land that slices through BLM lands). 

The first official roundup saw BLM simply go out to remove horses without any paperwork (analysis) at all. The contention over federal jurisdiction that was stopping “mustanging” was evident when the state of NV tried to lay claim to the horses so they could be shipped to slaughter auction. The court denied the states claim. The advocates claim broght a ruling that allowed that one roundup to happen (because BLM did not really have time yet to gather data and create any management planning) but said BLM could not just remove horses in the future because of a vague claim that the range would improve. (More HERE)

Instead of creating an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as they told the court they would, BLM created a Herd Management Area Plan (HMAP) in 1983. The HMAP basically outlined the fact that BLM had no real facts to create any AML, forage allocation or even the ability to identify which horses were Forest Service and which were BLM. The HMAP outlined the need for water improvements to keep horses in more upland areas to help distribute and reduce conflict with permittee. The “interim AML” was set in an agreement with the permittee that later filed a claim with the Interior Board of Land Appeals and created a formal settlement with BLM for AML of wild horses. Land Use Planning since that day has simply “affirmed” agreements.

In 2023 BLM finalized a new “gather plan-EA” for “inside and outside” Stone Cabin/Saulsbury. The new roundup plan continued to ignore the fact that the monitoring and analysis of data called for in the 1983 HMAP was never done. The water improvements were never done (except water hauls and pipelines to move livestock further into the HMA).

The new roundup also continued the “status quo” where, in fact, BLM was removing wild horses from Forest Service without ever doing monitoring or joint planning. Forest Service never does a roundup in Monitor… relying on BLM to remove horses with ever roundup. This is not legal.

We filed an appeal in the Interior Board of Land Appeals.

The permittee filed in federal court to force a mass removal.

WHE filed in federal court to protect wild horses.

The permittee lost his bid in court. Then, BLM approved another water haul to move livestock further into the HMA.

Our court case is moving toward a decision.

BLM has opened Scoping for a new HMAP to address the fact that the new roundup plan does not comply with the one in 1983… 2 years after they approved the roundup plan. Basically BLM is saying they can ignore underlying planning when creating another roundup plan and, if someone files litigation, they will just redo underlying planning 2 years later to modify it to assert compliance. That is actually not how NEPA works and is not in compliance with any semblance of morality toward the law.

Our case against the REMOVAL plan remains active.

We have sent extensive comments in for Scoping on the MANAGEMENT PLAN. Today is the last day to participate if you are inclined. (Just click the green “participate now” button on the BLM website)

Last year, we won two court ruling that demonstrate that BLM has illegally withheld creating HMAPs for most herds. At Stone Cabin, BLM did create an HMAP after litigation and then ignored it. This is the next battleground in the fight to finally gain real on range management planning based on data and science. 

An HMAP is a management document where a roundup might be one option if it is shown to be effective at meeting objectives. After 50 years of roundups at Stone Cabin, BLM has never shown removing wild horses has achieved their goals of rangeland improvements as livestock move further into the HMA. An HMAP is NOT a Gather Plan (even though BLM is trying to make it the same). 

Today is the last day to participate  in Scoping for a management plan, an HMAP, if you are inclined. (Just click the green “participate now” button on the BLM website)

WHE is prepared to continue to stand for these historic herds.

There are many layers to the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program… and many threats to the welfare and safety of our wild ones.

Right now, there are debates happening as budgets are being slashed that place our wild ones in holding in the target zone. Discussions are underway where many claim our wild ones held captive are a taxpayer burden and sales without limits (slaughter) or killing them should be on the table. (Learn more HERE about the budget debate)

All of our work is only possible with your support. 

We thank you for keeping the critical work we do at WHE running for our wild ones.