RSS

BLM Wild Horses and Our Environment: Yet More BLM USDA Controversey

23 Sep

valley below onion mtn 4_24_13

The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.”
― William Shakespeare

This article is Part Three of a 3-Part series on cattle grazing, sheep grazing, wild horses and the truth. . .

This was brought about by the many decisions both the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of the Interior had placed into their budget, then into action. The government agencies info-based data premised upon false and erroneous data realistically created problems in both the environment as well as in the wildlife ecosystems. All Public Lands now suffer, needlessly, due to decisions based not on true facts and scientific data, but upon politically manipulated science, driven by corporate agendas, and ruined lands beyond further use by cattle and sheep grazing.

The BLM and the U.S. Forestry Dept. (quite ironically) withdrew, taken out of technical reports and informational media driven reports in total, any data gathering or data in reports that included the accurate count of cattle and effects of cattle grazing on Public Lands (reports sanctioned by government contracts and/or research paid for by taxpayers), as well as the ability to gather causation of cattle on Public Lands.

BLM administrators argue that including cattle grazing into their reports, and collecting data on cattle currently populating Public Lands, can and would sway the technical data unfavorably.

Without this data, truthfully, our Public Lands are being destroyed, with the government agencies responsible for such wrong-doing being complacent about the destroyed land, in total! Cost to taxpayers = $Billions!

Total livestock use on our Public Lands (i.e. precisely Cattle Grazing and Sheep Grazing) currently exceed 10,000,000 Animal Unit Mouths to feed, and measured in AUM Units — or Annual Unit Mouths. An AUM represents forage use by a cow and a calf pair, or five sheep for one month. Left out of the this equation is Horses, as there is not only no available method to count the Horses within a Data Gathering and true representation of such, but there simply exists no prevalent or scientific method of doing a proper Horse Count for scientific purposes within BLM or our Public Lands.

When we break the mysterious Government-Speak, we discover the fact that these government agencies are expecting our Public Lands to feed, in truth, approximately in excess of 25,000,000 cattle and 20,000,000 sheep a month, and add to that more and more on a constant basis. The problem remains consistent, due to falsified information and data gather, heavily manipulated and corrupt data, and exclusion of primary source material within the data (i.e. specifically cattle and sheep data), that America’s Public Land’s are being ruined due to bad decisions based on false information, over grazing, and mismanagement.

We also must keep in mind these are low-numbers of population in regard to cattle and sheep (the most prevalent contributing factor to Public Land destruction), considered by many terrestrial biologists and other research scientist’s. These elements of data are spread over eleven contiguous western states, with five of these states bearing the largest number of cattle and sheep grazing on Public Lands. These five states are also the most controversial in regard to wild horse herd roundups and waste of taxpayer money within the context of roundups and wild horse herd storage.

Consumerism and Meat Consumption

When we consider, for example the decline in meat consumption in America, more problems develop within adequate reasoning for cattle and sheep remaining on Public Lands. There has been a consistent drop of beef consumption in America, and at last count, upon research of this particular market as of August 2013 —

Beef Consumption Down 12.8% and decreasing currently as this article written (Per USDA Report Sept. 2013).

Sheep similar in count, and decreased nearly 28% at the end of August 2013 (Per USDA Report of 2013).

This is significant as Public Land Grazing of cattle fulfills only 2.1% of the commercial market for beef, and only .9% of sheep.

So one has to consider, as taxpayers and as American’s why the BLM, the Forestry, and the USDA, among others, insist on us all paying (tax money for administrative and bogus other criminal activity from welfare ranchers, et al.) for the welfare ranchers to raise beef and sheep on Public Lands, when indeed there is no market for the same in the United States.

Are we to then believe that we are sacrificing America’s Wild Horse Herds for foreign shipment and their purchase of our beef and sheep products? Well, yes, we are now currently doing that!

As well, taxpayers pay-out such an astronomical amount of money, with no discount or return on this same beef and sheep grazing on Public Lands, that it becomes simply criminal in nature, stirred by corporations and politicians to enhance their profit base.

But this article is not about money, welfare ranching, or current reductions in the beef and sheep commercial markets. This article is about the sacrifice we make, here in America, in regard to our wildlife and environment that exists on our Public Lands, and especially the truth behind the Wild Horse Herd roundups and storage of them! This situation is a paramount sacrifice that is especially toxic, controversial, and needless, to say the least. It is simply based on no quality or truthful data!

Environmental and Wildlife Damage

It is important to realize that cattle and sheep use on Public Lands as well as Forestry Service lands becomes far more destructive, within a context of consistent and prolonged destruction to every ecosystem used to graze upon. Ecosystems demolished most often by irresponsible herding practice by welfare ranchers and too many cattle or sheep on a particular stretch of Public Lands. The fact is the situation is a far greater destruction in proportion with that of roads, timber harvests, and wildfires combined. . .

Least we also not forget that the effects of cattle and sheep while grazing on Public Lands prompted federal regulatory controls due to initial harmful effects to include trampling of vegetation, soils, woody plants, and ruination of streambanks as early as the 1890’s. So in reality this is not a new perception, rather, a situation stretched as far as it can possibly go, and truthfully must stop immediately.

Continued Use of Public Lands for Grazing

If livestock use on public lands continues at current levels, its interaction with anticipated changes in climate will likely worsen soil erosion, dust generation, and stream pollution. Soils whose moisture retention capacity has been reduced will undergo further drying by warming temperatures and/or drought and become even more susceptible to wind erosion. Increased Aeolian deposition on snow pack will hasten runoff, accentuating climate-induced hydrological changes on many Public Lands.

Warmer temperatures will likely trigger increased fire occurrence, causing further reductions in cover and composition of biological soil crusts, as well as vascular plants. In some forest types, cattle and sheep grazing has contributed to altered fire regimes and forest structure.

Getting Rid of Grazing on Public Lands

The economic impacts of managing public lands to emphasize environmental enhancements would be modestly positive. Other economic effects could include savings to the US Treasury because federal grazing fees on BLM and FS lands cover only about one-sixth of the agencies’ administration costs.

Most significantly, improved ecosystem function would lead to enhanced ecosystem services, with broad economic benefits. Various studies have documented that the economic values of other public-land resources (e.g., water, timber, recreation, and wilderness) are many times larger than that of grazing. Welfare ranching and cattle/sheep grazing has, indeed, has virtually become more of a criminal endeavor than anything else.

CONCLUSIVELY

Historical and on-going grazing from cattle and sheep use has affected soils, vegetation, wildlife, and water resources on vast expanses of public forests, shrublands, and grasslands across the American West in ways that are likely to accentuate further destruction and ruination of Public Lands.

If effective adaptations to the adverse effects of climate change are to be accomplished on western public lands, large-scale reductions or cessation of ecosystem stressors associated with cattle/sheep use are crucial. Federal and state land management agencies should seek and make wide use of opportunities to reduce significant cattle/sheep impacts, by ridding Public Lands of both, in order to facilitate ecosystem recovery and improve resiliency.

Such actions represent the most effective and extensive means for helping maintain or improve the ecological integrity of western landscapes and for the continued provision of valuable ecosystem services due to no longer having cattle or sheep grazing on Public Lands.

____________________________________

References:
Abella SR (2008) A systematic review of wild burro grazing effects on Mojave Desert vegetation, USA. Environ Manage 41:809–819
Allen DL (1974) Our wildlife legacy. Funk and Wagnalls, New York
Allington GRH, Valone TJ (2010) Reversal of desertification: the role of physical and chemical soil properties. J Arid Environ 74:973–977
Angermeier PL, Karr JR (1994) Biological integrity versus biological diversity as policy directives. Bioscience 44:690–697
Asner GP, Elmore AJ, Olander LP, Martin RE, Harris AT (2004)
Grazing systems, ecosystem responses, and global change. Ann Rev Environ Resour 29:261–299
Backlund P, Janetos A, Schimel D, Hatfield J, Ryan M, Archer S, Lettenmaier D (2008) The effects of climate change on agriculture, land resources, water resources, and biodiversity. A report by the US Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, http://www.climate science.gov/Library/sap/sap4-3/final-report/default.htm
Balling RC, Klopatek JM, Hildebrandt ML, Moritz CK, Watts J (1998) Impacts of land degradation on historical temperature records from the Sonoran Desert. Clim Change 40:669–681
Barnosky AD, Hadly EA, Bascompte J et al (2012) Approaching a state shift in Earth’s biosphere. Nature 486:52–58
Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Wu S, Palutikof JP (eds) (2008) Climate change and water. In: Technical paper of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC Secretariat, Geneva
Baxter CV, Fausch KD, Saunders WC (2005) Tangled webs: reciprocal flows of invertebrate prey link streams and riparian zones. Freshw Biol 50:201–220
Coggins GC, Wilkinson CF, Leshy JD, Fischman RL (2007) Federal public land and resources law. Foundation Press, New York
Connelly JW, Knick ST, Schroeder MA, Stiver SJ (2004) Conservation assessment of greater sage-grouse and sagebrush habitats. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Cheyenne.
Cowley ER (2002) Monitoring current year streambank alteration. US
Bureau of Land Management, Boise CWWR (Centers for Water and Wildland Resources) (1996) Sierra Nevada ecosystem project report. Wildland Resources Center Report No. 39. University of California, Davis
D’Antonio CM, Vitousek PM (1992) Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87
Dobkin DS, Rich AC, Pyle WH (1998) Habitat and avifaunal recovery from livestock grazing in a riparian meadow system of the northwestern Great Basin. Conserv Biol 12:209–221
DOI-OIG (Department of the Interior-Office of the Inspector General) (2010) Bureau of land management wild horse and burro program. Report C-IS-BLM-0018-2010, Washington, DC
Donahue DL (2007) Federal rangeland policy: perverting law and jeopardizing ecosystem services. J Land Use Environ Law 22:299–354
Dwire KA, Ryan SE, Shirley LJ, Lytjen D, Otting N, Dixon MK (2007) Influence of herbivory on regrowth of riparian shrubs following a wildland fire. J Am Water Resour Assoc 42:201–212
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (1999) A review and synthesis of effects of alterations to the water temperature regime on freshwater life stages of salmonids, with special reference to chinook salmon, USEPA Technical Report EPA 910-R-99-010.
USEPA, Seattle, http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.355.aspx.pdf
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2009) National water quality inventory: report to congress, 2004 reporting cycle. US Environmental Protection Agency EPA-841-R-08-001, Washington, DC
Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, and 21 others (2011) Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science 333:301–306
Field CB, Mortsch LD, Brklacich M, Forbes DL, Kovacs P, Patz JA, Running SW, Scott MJ (2007) North America. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds)
Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 617–652
Fleischner TL (1994) Ecological costs of livestock grazing in western North America. Conserv Biol 8:629–644
Thornton PK, Herrero M (2010) The inter-linkages between rapid growth in livestock production, climate change, and the impacts on water resources, land use, and deforestation. World Bank, Policy Research Paper 5178, Nairobi, Kenya
Torrell LA, Rimbey NR, Bartlett ET, Van Tassell LW, Tanaka JA (2001) An evaluation of the PRIA grazing fee formula. Current issues in rangeland resource economics: symposium proceedings. Western Regional Coordinating Committee on Rangeland Economics WCC-55. New Mexico State University Research Report Series 737, Las Cruces, New Mexico
Trimble SW, Mendel AC (1995) The cow as a geomorphic agent, a critical review. Geomorphology 13:233–253
Valone TJ, Meyer M, Brown JH, Chew RM (2002) Timescale of perennial grass recovery in desertified arid grasslands following livestock removal. Conserv Biol 16:995–1002
Vincent CH (2012) Grazing fees: overview and issues. Congressional Research Service RS21232, Washington DC
Weisberg PJ, Coughenour MB (2003) Model-based assessment of aspen responses to elk herbivory in Rocky Mountain National Park, USA. Environ Manage 32:152–169
Welch BL (2005) Big sagebrush: a sea fragmented into lakes, ponds, and puddles. US Forest Service GTR-RMRS-GTR-144, Fort Collins, Colorado
Westerling AL, Hidalgo HG, Cayan DR, Swetnam TW (2006) Warming and earlier spring increase western U.S. forest wildfire activity. Science 313:940–943
Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998)
Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615
Worster D (1992) Under western skies: nature and history in the American west. Oxford University Press, New York
WSWC (Western States Water Council) (1989) Preliminary summary of findings, In: Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Workshop, Midvale, Utah, pp 25–28
Wu L, He N, Wang Y, Han X (2008) Storage and dynamics of carbon and nitrogen in soil after grazing exclusion in Leymus chinensis grasslands of northern China. J Environ Qual 37:663–668

Advertisements
 
9 Comments

Posted by on September 23, 2013 in Uncategorized

 

9 responses to “BLM Wild Horses and Our Environment: Yet More BLM USDA Controversey

  1. Louie C

    September 24, 2013 at 7:42 am

    http://act.wildhorsepreservation.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=15398

    TAKE A STAND FOR CALIFORNIA MUSTANGS IN MASSACRE LAKES HMA
    BLM Action Aims to Reduce Wild Horse Population While Allowing Many Times More Livestock in Designated Mustang Habitat

    Comments Due by Friday, September 27, 2013
    The wild horse herd of the Massacre Lakes Herd Management Area, one of California’s few remaining wild horse populations, has not been touched by man or helicopter since 1988. As such, the herd is valuable for scientific research, as well deserving of its fair share of forage and water, on lands designated by Congress as “principally but not exclusively for their welfare.”

     
  2. Louie C

    September 24, 2013 at 7:46 am

    http://act.wildhorsepreservation.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=15346

    Comments Due by September 27, 2013

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is advancing a devastating plan to wipe out wild horses in the Wyoming Checkerboard, a two million acre swath of public and private land in the southern portion of the state. Nearly half of Wyoming’s remaining mustangs live in this area. Your comments are needed now!.

    At the behest of the Rock Springs Grazing Association, whose members enjoy tax subsidized grazing on the public lands portions of the checkerboard, the BLM intends to:

    Zero out (eradicate wild horses from) the Salt Wells Creek and Great Divide Basin Herd Management Areas (HMAs).

    Reduce the allowable management level for the Adobe Town HMA from 610-800 horses.to 225-450 horses.

    Convert the wild free-roaming horse population in the White Mountain HMA to a sterilized, non-reproducing herd.

     
  3. Adahy Linda

    September 25, 2013 at 11:02 pm

    And to top that all ; the horses are being herded by helicopter out of their areas & being up for auction for trespassing , when forced off of their designated land !! It must be stopped

     
  4. Louie C

    September 29, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    http://protectmustangs.org/?p=5233
    We need land to rescue, gentle and find homes for at-risk wild horses. Help us find the facility to make this happen.
    SHARE because having the place to take in rescued wild horses for gentling and adoption means saving wild horses from slaughter! We need your help to find this donated or low cost place in the Bay Area!
    If we had the facility we could have taken at least one truckload of 30+ wild horses from the horrible Sheldon Roundup that just happened.
    HELP us find the facility and land to help the horses. We are filing for our 501c3 nonprofit status because we have attained our goals during these past 2 years and serve America’s wild horses with no agenda outside of helping them.
    http://www.ProtectMustangs.org
    Please send an email to Contact@ProtectMustangs.org for more information.
    Remember sharing is caring.

     
  5. Louie C

    September 30, 2013 at 5:00 am

    RUBY PIPELINE

    The Mustang Conspiracy: British Petroleum and The Ruby Pipeline
    PART 2
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/mustangconspiracy/part2.html

    In Part two of our hard hitting ATSNews Special Report: “SEX, DRUGS, MUSTANGS, CORRUPTION and BP TOO”, ATSnews’ Mark Allin (AKA: Springer) and 17 time Emmy Award Winner, KLAS 8 News Now (Las Vegas, NV) Investigative Reporter, George Knapp discuss the unbelievable corruption, sex and drug parties and payola schemes that transpired between the MMS and several Big Oil Companies. The Inspector General of the U.S. investigated the “Culture of Substance Abuse and Corruption” that ran rampant through the Denver Office of the MMS and several big oil companies from 2002 through 2006. The U.S. Taxpayer was bilked out of hundreds of millions of dollars, the environment was utterly neglected, the affected areas populations were at great risk (and still are), all for the betterment of a handful of Big Oil Companies’ bottom lines.

    You may be surprised to learn that revenues generated by Royalties paid to the U.S. Government, in return for exploiting the oil reserves under public lands, is the second only to TAXES in total gross income for the U.S. Government. That’s a double edged statement. On the one hand, it becomes obvious why government is so happy to allow things like “self regulation” to companies like BP, in spite of their abysmal record. On the other hand, it begs the questions “Why do these appointed (NOT elected) officials sell these royalties for only pennies on the dollar compared to their fair market value? Why do they totally disregard the laws of the land and allow these companies to do whatever they want to increase profits and control costs by avoiding, or totally ignoring, health, environment and safety regulations?”

    Why?

    Because our public servants are, literally, IN BED with these companies.
    Finally, part two also discusses the alleged, “real reason” for the very recent Mustang round ups off the horse’s legal land. The 675 mile long Ruby Natural Gas Pipeline that runs right through the Calico Herd’s protected lands. After hearing about this pipeline, ATSNews’ Mark Allin started doing some good old fashioned investigative reporting of his own to see just who was behind this pipeline, who would benefit from it most. What he discovered is disturbing but not surprising. The same Corporate Raiders who have been fined hundreds of millions of dollars, created environmental disasters all over the U.S. (and many other parts of the world) because they just turn their nose up at safety regulations, best practices, and common sense are ALL involved with the Ruby Pipeline.

    The same bunch of villains who have plundered our public lands for decades, destroyed lives through their negligence and horrid lack of concern for anything but huge profits are now destroying yet another piece of Americana, the Wild Mustangs of the Great Southwest. Watch part two and find out who these corporate thugs are and hear Mark’s plea to the ATS Community to help us expose the rest of this story!

     
  6. Louie C

    September 30, 2013 at 5:01 am

    The Mustang Conspiracy: Sex, Drugs, Corruption, and BP. Part 1 in HD
    PART 1
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/mustangconspiracy/index.html

    What, you may ask, could “Sex, Drugs, Mustangs, Corruption and BP” have in common? That’s not only a fair question, it has an astounding and disgusting answer that exposes one of the most bizarre, unethical, horridly sad and disturbing conspiracies we’ve come across yet

    Please note, we said Conspiracy, not Conspiracy Theory. That’s very important.
    In this two part Special Report, ATS News’ Mark Allin interviews George Knapp in Las Vegas, Nevada about a very dark and very real travesty that is being played out by a cast of bad actors from the U.S. Government (U.S. Department of the Interior and its subsidiary agencies; The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and The Minerals Management Services (MMS)), “Big Agriculture”, and “Big Oil”. It all starts up in the Northern Deserts of Nevada where the U.S. Federal Government, in a Unanimous Vote of the U.S. Congress, set aside millions of acres of public lands for the indigenous wild horses, or Mustangs as they are properly called, back in 1971.

    The idea was to make sure this piece of “Americana” was protected from human encroachment and allowed to live free on the lands their ancestors roamed millions of years ago.� Congress charged the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management with the stewardship of both the land and the Mustangs. What we reveal in this interview shows not only that the Bureau failed horribly in that stewardship, but did so by colluding with big industry to destroy the very beings they were entrusted with protecting. The scandals are numerous and tawdry, the lies are plentiful and ludicrous, the attitudes are sadly predictable and the result is the wholesale destruction of the American people’s culture and waste of the American people’s treasure(read tax dollars) by their own servants.

    Part one covers the history of the BLM’s lies and provides the factual counterpoint to those lies from a former BLM employee, Craig Downer, who quit in disgust and has proven the BLM’s data is false. Part one also covers the investigations into the bogus data used to support these lies, via FOIA work done by a private citizen, Cindy MacDonald, that shows what the true motivations are behind these heinous acts. We’ll also get a glimpse into George’s 20 plus year investigation of this activity , the truth about the horses, their land and how it’s been handed over to Big Agriculture (Corporate Cattle Ranches) and Big Oil,� all at the expense of the U.S. Tax Payer and in violation of U.S. Federal Law.

     
  7. Louie C

    October 1, 2013 at 5:39 am

    http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/2013/09/25/forest-service-employees-vote-no-confidence-on-leadership/
    FOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES VOTE NO CONFIDENCE ON LEADERSHIP
    Survey Reveals Strong Doubts on Management Competence, Integrity and Policies
    Posted on Sep 25, 2013

    Washington, DC — U.S. Forest Service employees do not think very highly of their agency’s leadership, according to survey results released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Most Forest Service professionals lack basic respect for top managers, even doubting their honesty.
    These startling results are found in a document called “Forest Service FEVS [Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey] Analysis and Recommendations” dated March 28, 2013 but circulated recently inside the agency. Compiled by a consulting company named CI International, it summarizes agency-wide survey results, including a breakdown of survey responses from each Forest Service division.
    The survey found that overwhelming majorities of employee respondents like what they do, believe it is important and feel there is mutual respect with their immediate supervisors. Those positive perspectives are reversed, however, with respect to views expressed about Forest Service leadership:
    • “Senior leaders are not well respected (only 37%). An overwhelming majority of employees do not agree with their policies and practices (only 29%)”;
    • “Just over half of employees agree agency is accomplishing its mission (55%) and is a good place to work (57%)” ; and
    • Leadership is unable to generate “high-levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce (only 30%) or as standards of honesty and integrity (only 45%).”
    “This is one of the most resounding workforce votes of no confidence I have ever seen,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that this latest poll is consistent with employees ranking the Forest Service 254th out of 292 federal agency components in the 2012 Best Places to Work survey. “These survey results suggest that if the Forest Service was a country it would be ripe for an Arab Spring.”
    By far, the most negative scores were registered by the Law Enforcement & Investigations division. A 2011 management review found that habitually troubled Forest Service law enforcement “is a broken system from top to bottom.” One indication of the level of dysfunction is that earlier this year top LE&I managers received hefty raises amidst sequester-induced cutbacks.
    “By retaining a widely disrespected and despised law enforcement leadership, the Forest Service is, in essence, giving its professional staff the middle finger,” added Ruch. “In order to begin winning back their employees, the Forest Service needs to lop off management deadwood, starting with law enforcement.”

     
  8. grandmagregg

    October 1, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    If I rent a house and then go to the bank and try to take out a loan against the house I RENT … what do you think the bank would do? As the bank security guard was throwing me out on my ear … they would probably (and rightfully) notify law enforcement that I had tried to commit fraud.

    “What would you do if you owned 180 million acres of land in the American West? Would you
    lease almost 80 percent of it to livestock grazers (many of them corporations) for 10 percent of its
    market value, only to watch livestock shear off the native vegetation, erode the soil, degrade water
    quality, reduce water quantity, destroy riparian areas and harm endangered species, native plants, and wildlife? When grazing fees to use your land did not cover the cost of monitoring and protecting the natural resources, would you then pay millions of dollars of your own money every year to cover the shortfall? And would you then stand by and watch as those abusing your land received additional millions of dollars in loans using the grazing privileges you granted as collateral for their debt?

    Bad news. You already are.

    On public lands owned by the American people and managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), federally subsidized livestock grazing is rapidly destroying the vitality of our native ecosystems. There are many good arguments against continuing federal public lands ranching, including myriad economic and fiscal arguments. This report details another one.”

    http://www.wildearthguardians.org/site/DocServer/Report_Mortgaging_Our_Natural_Heritage.pdf?docID=962

     
  9. Louie C

    October 2, 2013 at 10:37 pm

    Just going through some archives. This doesn’t really fit under this article…but then again..it does.

    http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/story/1274942614j1f7k1g8j78
    SCI Helps Win Victory in Nevada Wild Horse Roundup Case
    Washington, D.C. – Safari Club International (SCI) has successfully defended the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) efforts to manage destructive wild horses in northwest Nevada. Plaintiffs, including an animal rights group, had launched baseless attacks on BLM’s management practices in a federal lawsuit. On May 24, 2010 the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, based on arguments provided by SCI, dismissed the lawsuit, finding that none of the plaintiffs had “standing” to sue.

     

Leave a Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: