Stone Cabin and Saulsbury Herd Management Areas (HMA) were the site of the first official roundup after the 1971 Wild Horse and Burros Act passed. It was the location of the first lawsuit as the state claimed the 1971 Act was unconstitutional and they wanted to take ownership of the horses and send them to the sale barn. Advocates of the day stepped up as BLM failed to even do minimal analysis under the new National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The court found the 1971 Act would stand (that the state could not take the horses and sell them to continue mustanging) and that BLM had to complete an actual analysis and could not, in the future, simply roundup wild horses by simply claiming that there might be some range improvement, they had to create planning and transparent analysis. (See more about the first roundup and Velma Johnston HERE)

In many ways we are still fighting that first battle in the courts today. The only exception is that BLM did create a Herd Management Area Plan (HMAP) in 1983 and simply ignored it for over 40 years. Instead, BLM just keeps doing what they did in 1975: claiming (without showing actual data) that the horses are causing damage as they set their utilization cage monitoring sites where domestic livestock graze and never differentiating damages. At Stone Cabin and Saulsbury, BLM has never done any of the studies or monitoring in the 1983 plan… even to the extent of failing to identify which wild horses are under their jurisdiction and which are Forest Service. In fact, Forest Service has not done their own roundups (or roundup plans) simply relying on BLM to take everything with a quiet “wink and a nod.”

Bachelor band

In 2012, BLM said they would update the HMAP. In 2016 they began work on it. They began to say they would do some of what was in the 1983 plan (like reevaluating AML and identifying critical migration routes between Forest Service and BLM).

Instead, BLM just stopped work on this a few short months into the process. BLM began approving new fencing and water pipelines to expand livestock further into the HMA. Forest Service opened up areas that were officially closed to livestock, but livestock ran in trespass each year anyway.

In 2023, BLM approved another roundup plan to slam wild horses down to an AML they set in the 90s in an agreement with the permittee (consent decree), not data-driven and through an HMAP update (as the HMAP stated). They created another ten-year roundup plan that ignores the underlying HMAP.

The permittee did what worked in the past and filed a lawsuit to force a removal. Not only was BLM repeating a past that was unjust, we feared another backdoor deal as we scrambled and filed our own lawsuit. This “management by deal and not data” needs to end. Far too many of our wild horse and burro herds face this same reality… and it is wrong.

The Stone Cabin grey is a living reminder of a poker game back in the silver rush days when a gunslinger (Longstreet) won a thoroughbred and turned him out to breed so he could produce horses. How “wild west” can you get? The phrase “living symbol of the pioneer spirit” tied to the unique history of the “land they stand,” the words in the 1971 law, exits today in every heartbeat of the Stone Cabin grey. The 1971 law is part species protection and part heritage preservation. BLM takes none of that into account.

The suit to force a removal lost in district court.

Our case to hold them accountable to the “full force and effect” (the language used when a decision becomes enforceable) 1983 HMAP moved forward through full briefing. As our case went through briefing, BLM began Scoping for an HMAP update for Stone Cabin and, after 40 years, an HMAP for Saulsbury. BLM recognized that they had to finally do something… but they only did something because we filed a lawsuit and they needed to try to tell the court our case was “moot” now.

During the Hearing yesterday… 

BLM is trying to tell the court that they can create an action plan (a gather-ea) that does not comply with a management plan (HMAP-EA) and then, because someone filed a lawsuit, simply move to change the underlying management plan without ever complying with parameters. In court yesterday, the lawyer for BLM even said “there will be a lot of angry people” if you do not let this gather plan stand referring to the permittees lawsuit (yes, he actually said that as if that would be a legal argument).

Our attorney focused on the facts. BLM does have the authority to create roundup plan EAs. But, BLM must follow the steps of the process in entirety and not pick and choose what they decide to ignore. If there is an approved underlying plan (HMAP-EA) it cannot be ignored. If BLM claims a result (i.e. the horses are responsible for damages or a certain number of horses are what the range can sustain) they have to disclose the data and methodology, not simply their conclusion. She likened it to a math class; the teacher gives a math problem and you only give an answer; the teacher needs to see how you arrived at that answer. If your answer is wrong, only by seeing the equation can we give input to attempt to fix it.

There were numerous arguments involving caselaw and the layers of law that allow an argument to be heard. Many in the public believe you simply argue facts. Yes, you argue facts, but they have to fit into categories that allow them to be presented and specific ways they have to be argued. BLM primarily relied on provisions that give them what is called “deference” and “discretion.” In other words, because they are BLM it means they have to be believed and can ignore what they choose to ignore. Our attorney argued that is too broad and gave examples. The hearing covered numerous issues and went longer than the allotted time.

Now we wait.

As with every lawsuit the waiting is the hardest part of all. We began this fight against this plan two years ago.

We began to push BLM to update this HMAP in 2012.

We have done our very best with what we have at hand and inside the processes available to us to gain some justice for this historic herd and the individual wild horses we love on those ranges.

In no way does this short update cover the decades of experiences we have had at Stone Cabin/Saulsbury or the hundreds of written pages filed with the court.

Our emotions are running high. We are keeping ourselves busy on other cases today and building blocks to lay the foundation for new ones. We will not stop in our pursuit for justice.

We will update you as soon as there is a ruling. Saying a prayer is welcome.

All of our work is only possible with your support.

Together, we will take a strong stand to defend our precious wild ones.