Horse slaughter?

[Traxx]

Yeah....
The popularity of the Kiger horses,skyrocketed,when Bobby Ingersol,took one to the Snaffle bit futurity and beat out,most of the bred up quarter horses.
The First time i ever saw or heard of T Boone or Madeline Pickens was at a BLM auction,Where T boone bid and won a kiger for his then wife Madeline,for a sum of $25.000.
She is now the self appointed,bought and paid for,queen caped crusader  of the Mustang protection cause,yet several were found dead recently from lack of water on her private sanctuary.

She tried to make it out to be  a case of outside sabotage,in the media and to the uneducated public,but one look at the evidence by anyone with any horse sense,told a completely different story.

Coincidentally and of interest to many on the site is this....

Feral horses are extremely territorial and protective of a water source.They will not only run other livestock off of a source,but wildlife as well.I have witnessed it many times.

[JW_Halverson]

I find it odd when most of the people that battle the loudest FOR the feral horses that have usurped and destroyed habitat for the local native species are the same people that rail AGAINST the European treatment of Native Americans. 

Granted, I am beginning to stray into politics at this point, so I will stop. 

[Hummingbird Point]

Also...
I wanted to adress a previous comment.
  Best to just leave them alone and let nature sort it out.
That would,eventually work in managing the horse numbers,but would also effect others within the multiple use spectrum and would result in eradication of other species and usage to the point of no return.

I understand where you're coming from.  I got my wildlife degree in the early 90's and that type of thinking was pretty well drummed into my head as dogma.  Since then, some historical perspective and observations of the bigger picture leads me to believe it's a bit overblown.  It seems to me that wildlife habitat cannot be created or destroyed, only changed.  Nature is extraordinarily resilient and adaptable.  Look at some of the huge changes we've made to the landscape in the past few centuries that by classical thinking in wildlife biology should have been utterly catastrophic:  We completely eliminated the alpha predator, wolves, from vast areas.  We completely changed the wetland ecology of at least half of what is now the United States by the near extinction of the beaver.  In the blink of an eye megatons of highly nutritious wildlife food were lost with the chestnut blight.  And what happened?  Not much.  Nature finds a way.

The population of feral horses is a drop in the bucket compared to all the other non-native animals we have inflicted upon the ecosystem:  European Starlings, House Sparrows, pigeons, nutria, black rats, Norway rats, house mice, pythons, feral hogs, feral cats, all of which are considered bad for the environment while all indications are that the environment doesn't really care one way or the other.

The creek bottom down below me is choked with Chinese privet, an invasive, non-native weed.  The classically trained wildlife biologist in me hates the privet.  The naturalist in me can't help but notice that the beavers love it and that it grows back faster after cutting than any native plant.  In the middle of May it blooms with a nectar rich flower which the local bees and butterflies flock too, with no qualms about it being not supposed to grow there.  The flowers form a blue berry that hangs in clumps all winter long to feed the birds, the leaves are evergreen providing shelter and cover and the dense stands make lovely places to hide a nest.  Which makes me wonder what is so bad about it?

So I think if the horses are left alone, while there will be some bad short term changes, sooner than you would think everything will come back into balance, and the upshot will be not much of anything.  Regardless, this is a political hot potato ten times worse than the wolf reintroduction (an utterly epic mess!) so I don't know that there's much else to be done.

Keith

[Stoker]

Near me Is CFB Suffeid.. Long story short.. They had about 400 ''Wild horses'' Mostly old nags released on the base.. They were doing damage to the prairie.. So round'em up sell'em off.. Let's reintroduce elk which have'nt been here for over 125 years... Let's get 700..  Fast forward to today 12,000 elk for the last 3 years they have a managment cull hunts.. There's no easy answer to these problems.. Leave well enough alone.. Rant over
Thanks Leroy

[sleek]

People keep saying the animals are destroying the prarie. Well, are they? The ground is there to support the life, id it being destroyed when life takes from it, or is it just being used to its purpose? Elk, bison, all grass feeding animals do the same.  What's the difference?

[mullet]

Traxx; I was there in 77 and 78, and watched the round ups around Irish Canyon and read the stories in the Rock Springs newspaper about the Adoption Program. Whether it was true or not , the talk was the leftovers from the Adoptions were disposed of.

[Traxx]

Sleek,
The difference,is in the way horses graze,compared to wild ungulates.Horses have  an upper and lower teeth system,that enable them to graze the grasses closer to the root system  and often they pull it up completely while grazing.Because the horses are not rotated and removed from the range,like other domestic livestock,the horses will completely overgraze an area before moving on to fresh graze.

Also,concerning riparian areas,Domestic livestock,such as sheep and cattle prefer to drink without getting in to a water area,if they can avoid it.Horses,on the other hand,prefer to get at least their front hooves in to the water,to obtain moisture to their hooves for hoof health.

[Traxx]

Mullet....
In 77-78,there was no restrictions on the age a horse could be adopted,as there is today.If there were animals  disposed of,it was due to illness or injury,that would prevent them from qualifying for the adoption process.

One of the criteria in the adoption process is,that an adopter must have the horse in their care,with periodic compliance checks,for 1 year,before they can obtain title to that animal.This prevents people from adopting the horses to sell for slaughter,as having them for a year,would negate any profit they could make on these animals in that capacity.Sale yards and slaughter houses,when they could legally operate in this country,wouldnt touch a adopted horse,without attached title for fear of federal prosecution,but that doesnt stop the activist,from voicing such propaganda to further their support.they use the media for this,constantly.
I am authorized to do compliance checks and sign titles,for ownership and have done hundreds of them,in the last 30 some years.

[mullet]

Thank you, I'm always happy to hearing the real, truth.

[Traxx]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/09/16/blm-we-do-not-and-not-euthanize-wild-horses/90527106/

[Traxx]

You see what i mean about activist groups,using the media?
Ive seen it done,countless times and even been a victim of it personally.

Way too many uneducated and less than honorable,caped crusaders out there,these days.

[Zuma]

Don't forget "The Misfits"
Last flick for both Gable
and Monroe, I think.
Zuma

[Traxx]

Zuma....
I shoe horses,for the woman who owns the house from the movie.It still looks exactly the same.She calls it quail run ranch now.

[Zuma]

Zuma....
I shoe horses,for the woman who owns the house from the movie.It still looks exactly the same.She calls it quail run ranch now.

Wow! Way cool
Thanks for posting all your info and knowledge.
Very interesting to a kid that grew up on Gene Autry
and Hopalong Cassidy.
Zuma