Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971, and the corruption within, is discussed here. Indeed a noble Congressional situation and passed unanimously at the time. The spirit was a good-faith gesture, by Law, toward America’s Wild Horse Herds — But something happened, something terrible happened, and it involved corruption from the top down, and terms of “Acceptable Abuse” which changed everything:
Congressional findings and declaration of policy, and states clearly:
“Congress finds and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; that they contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people; and that these horses and burros are fast disappearing from the American scene. It is the policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, or death; and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.”
The Breaking Down of the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971
The initial “blast” of ingenuity and a caring spirit exists in the very opening of the W.H. & B. Act of 971. From then onward reality, the harsh mistress, enters into the realm of managing America’s Wild Horse Herds. This actual spirit of well written “Congressional Declaration” becomes nothing more than deception. Oddly, not by Congress, who had an honest concern toward America’s Wild Horse Herds, and correcting the blatant mistreatment of them within a protective context. No, this comes down to the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, and corruption combined with government dishonesty.
We have seen an absolute-reality take place, the disappearance over the years of the care and appropriate managing of America’s Wild Horse Herds. The Reality: Proper Management has been replaced with what is termed “Acceptable Abuse” which demonstrates beyond a doubt that the W.H.&B.P. Board of Consultants and the Bureau of Land Management are and always have been unqualified and corrupt; this is an absolute and quantitative reality directly related to their mismanagement or corrupt administration of America’s Wild Horse Herds. The Federal court cases alone demonstrate beyond a doubt this is reality, and at heavy cost to taxpayers, yet ignored and replaced by misinformation and outright lies to the public, cloaked in some type of odd reasoning with hopes the public will accept it! The Public has not!
The consultants on the board have a narrow margin of backgrounds. Their history of demonstrating no knowledgeable context of proper management of horses, other than a livestock mentality, becomes quite obvious within their decisions. This becomes significant, extremely devastating and on the road toward extinction of our wild horses, in their unqualified behavior to manage America’s Wild Horse Herds.
The absolute destruction of our Wild Horse Herds becomes more applicable, and fit to their purpose — all the while at a much higher cost to taxpayers. The actual No-Roundup / No Abuse management paradigm, basically leaving the wild horses on America’s Public Lands with a manage-to-enhance and safe-guard them, in reality saves taxpayers $Billions of dollars! But ignored, because in their minds it is only taxpayer money, and to hell with taxpayers!
This leads to erroneous and contemptible management by BLM; whereas, the W.H.& B. Act of 1971 becomes ignored to the point of being null and void. This leads to another harsh reality, contentiousness rather than preservation; management driven by animosity rather than a standard set for the protection of a vulnerable specifies; and a total waste of taxpayer money, with no proper or legitimate explanation toward expenditure. The W.H.&B. Act of 1971 simply becomes a deceptive-cloak to hide and obtain money, because in reality there exists no type of proper management or care of America’s Wild Horse Herds what so ever and in accord with the Act.
Vulnerable Species Leads to Extinction
We have learned many things over the years when it comes to extinction of our wildlife. Apparently, these same learned attributes remain ignored by those same people, who claim to be our nation’s Stewarts of our Public Lands and America’s Wildlife. Well documented lessons from the past, although ignored currently, still remain the key toward avoiding extinction of a species.
For example yes, there is a difference between a Wild Horse and a domesticated bred horse; Yes, there is a difference between the many species of wolves, and the domestic dogs of the world; It is this simple to understand.
1. Slow moving animals are no competition to man-made devises such as helicopters used in the wild horse herd roundups — i.e. no legitimate reasons are ever given to conform to the W.H. & B. Act of 1971 for legitimate roundups — the W.H. & B. Act is ignored in total;
2. Large animals are vulnerable to over-hunting as well as to government agencies convoluted lies and misinformation, which it has been shown in history, many times, leading to species extinction of many animals;
3. Altruism, or specifies that have come close to civilization, bonds established in regard to images or friendships, etc., have become detrimental to many species throughout history — i.e. wild horses, wolves, buffalo, Steller’s Sea Cow, the Passenger Pigeon, etc;
4. Vulnerability due to restricted habitat has been a major cause of wild life extinction throughout history, and is well documented — a lesson here to be not only learned but placed into management paradigms, especially when managing wild horses or wolves;
5. A related, and certainly obvious situation within this context, is the “Over-Specialization of Habitat” — and within this discussion cattle and the lies perpetrated by government agencies such as the BLM to enhance our Public Lands with cattle, oil, energy, mining, and other corporate circumstances, etc. . . and to hell with America’s natural ecological habitats and wildlife.
With this categorical explanation, which is well documented and referenced quite well, yet ignored, remains troublesome to the majority of Americans. The real-truth is any species that suffers from several of these factors can be quickly eliminated.
The fact is that ecological systems are vulnerable to many environmental situations. Our civilization intruding upon any of these systems becomes detrimental to the over all balance of many other ecological systems. Our civilization has a history of taking-over lands that once belonged to wildlife and vegetation, and those same elements of nature are now extinct, sadly!
Public Lands and Range Mangers do have access to wildlife that is beneficial to America’s Ecological systems. It can be attributable to a “language of protection” toward our environment (which includes Wild Horse Herds), if they are qualified to observe these situations. Most of them are not qualified, so good management is currently non-existent!
Listening and observing what our natural environment has to tell us is of significance, always. A point of discussion currently that is picking up momentum within the environmental community is the fact of how we identify the difference between a technical report generated by a political agenda — compared to a technical report that positively approaches resolution toward solving a serious environmental or wildlife issue of concern.
Yes, we can use the wild horse herds to let us know of ecological viability within many ecological systems, simply by their presence and health. Ironically, to many environmentalists, to include terrestrial and wildlife research biologists, government agencies and their consultants ignore this situation.
This is due to government employees lack of qualifications to manage our Public Lands; due to lack of ingenuity and competence to tell the truth; and, due to our present government employees lack of ethics and responsibility in safe-guarding taxpayer money.
When we have proper information, and the public needs this information to rationally confront our government presently, we have the tools to enhance and better America’s over all environment. If we ignore any of the historical facts, then combine them with arrogant management decisions, we will lose not only wildlife but significant and life giving habitat that keeps us all alive. Ultimately, the fact is we need better representation and the reality of more and better qualified people to manage our wildlife and environmental situations of this world.
The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 exemplifies this situation to the thousandth degree, and America’s Wild Horse Herds are paying the price — government agency’s bad behavior and bad decision making — when compared to actually following the very premise of what the Act outlines — and the ever present historical value of managing not only a diverse realm of ecological systems, but our wildlife as well.
The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 Explained. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_and_Free-Roaming_Horses_and_Burros_Act_of_1971
Burea of Land Management version of the W.H.&B. Act of 1971 http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/92-195.htm
The Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (without BLM reference and perspective) http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Wild+FreeRoaming+Horses+and+Burros+Act+of+1971.-a0141802026
Dry saline land: an investigation using ground-based geophysics, soil survey and spatial methods near Jamestown, South Australia. By R.W. Fitzpatrick, M. Thomas, P.J. Davies and B.G. Williams
Literature Review of Factors Influencing Public Perceptions of Water Reuse. By Murni Po, Juliane D. Kaercher and Blair E. Nancarrow – NOTE: This report has been updated in 2004 – click here for the updated version.
Development of a strategy for monitoring Australia’s natural resources: a discussion paper. By Mac Kirby, Neil McKenzie and Myriam Bormans
Quantifying and managing sources of sediments and nutrients in low-lying canelands. By Christian H. Roth, Fleur Visser, Robert Wasson, John Reghenzani and Ian Prosser
Use of APSIM to simulate water balances of dryland farming systems in south eastern Australia. By K. Verburg and W.J. Bond
Salt Transport in the Bremer Hills, SA. Interpretation of Spatial Datasets for Salt Distribution. Fourth report for NAP South Australian Salt Mapping and Management. Chris Smitt, Jim Cox and Phil Davies
Modelling catchment-scale nutrient generation. By Lachlan T.H. Newham and John J. Drewry
The Floodplain Risk Methodology (FRM): A suite of tools to rapidly assess at the regional scale the impacts of groundwater inflows and benefits of improved inundation on the floodplains of the lower River Murray. By Kate Holland, Ian Jolly, Ian Overton, Matt Miles, Linda Vears and Glen Walker
Ecological Risk Assessment for the Wetlands of the Lower Burdekin. By Bart M. Kellett, Terry Walshe and Keith L. Bristow
Ivanhoe Plain Aquifer Pumping Trial July 2003 – April 2005: Stage 1 OrdRiver Irrigation Area, Kununurra, Western Australia. By Anthony J. Smith, Duncan Palmer, Daniel W. Pollock and Ramsis B. Salama
Modelling periphyton biomass, photosynthesis and respiration in streams. By J. J. Christopher Rutherford and Susan M. Cuddy
Effects of salinity on stream ecosystems: improving models for macroinvertebrates. By J. Christopher Rutherford and Ben J. Kefford
A conceptual model of particulate trapping in riparian buffers. By Lachlan Newham, Kit Rutherford, and Barry Croke
Preliminary Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points Plan (HACCP) – Salisbury Stormwater to Drinking Water Aquifer Storage Transfer and Recovery (ASTR) Project. By Swierc, J., Page, D., Van Leeuwen, J. and Dillon, P.
A Bilingual User’s Guide for the Decision Support Tool for Managing Re-Vegetation and its Impact on Hydrology (ReVegIH) in the Coarse Sandy Hilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China. By Li, L.T., McVicar, T.R., Van Niel, T.G. Zhang, L., Li, R., Yang, Q.K., Zhang, X.P., Mu, X.M., Wen, Z.M., Liu, W.Z., Zhao, Y.A. and Liu, Z.H.
Mapping Perennial Vegetation Suitability and Identifying Priority Areas for Implementing the Re-Vegetation Program in the Coarse SandyHilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China. By Tim R. McVicar, ZhongMing Wen, Tom G. Van Niel, LingTao Li, QinKe Yang, Rui Li and Feng Jiao
Managing Change: Australian structural adjustment lessons for water. By J.C. McColl and M.D. Young
Estimates of average hydraulic drivers for sediment and nutrient fluxes in the GBR catchments from SedNet. By F.J. Cook and A. Henderson
Idealised analogue for predicting groundwater response times from sloping aquifers. By Glen R. Walker, Mat Gilfedder, and Warrick R. Dawes
Understanding spatial patterns of discharge in semi-arid regions using a recharge-discharge balance to determine vegetation health. By Rebecca Doble, Glen Walker and Craig Simmons
Modelling the fate of molinate in rice paddies of South Eastern Australia using RICEWQ. By Evan W.Christen, Wendy C. Quayle, Sang-Ok Chung and Ki Jung Park
Pesticide use in the 6th Creek sub-catchment, Mt. Lofty Ranges, S.A. and assessment of risk of off-site movement using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana
Pesticide use in the Ord River Irrigation Area, Western Australia, and Risk Assessment of Off-site Impact using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana
An Automated Remote Digital Image Collection System. By Aaron Hawdon and Rex Keen
Spatially Distributing 21 Years of Monthly Hydrometeorological Data in China: Spatio-Temporal Analysis of FAO-56 Crop Reference Evapotranspiration and Pan Evaporation in the Context of Climate Change. By Tim R. McVicar, LingTao Li, Tom G. Van Niel, Michael F. Hutchinson, XingMin Mu and ZhiHong Liu