Mr. O'Connor,
I read your opinion and the very few interspersed facts, followed by a ridiculous "possible solution."
I am appalled by the erroneous statements presented as though they are fact. A solution that would show no compassion instead would be a wasting death to the wild horses you wish to "protect."
As to item 17 - Our great-grandkids could, if you have your way, be told that our historic ranchers were eradicated in preference to a non-native invasive species, which continued to increase past the ecosystem's ability to support them. As a result we then became dependent upon foreign food suppliers. The wild horse herds were decimated by thirst, famine and disease. The ravages to the rangeland destroyed the habitat. Rather than being the breadbasket of the world, we outsourced our food production until we truly achieved hunger.
Wild horses are federally protected, though clearly not well-managed, by the BLM bureaucrats. Their numbers continue to increase year after year. Obviously they are not endangered, nor are they being systematically eradicated.
There are a multitude of advocates for the wild horses, which speak up, fundraise and litigate.
Cattle are permitted and have no monopoly.
Cattle grazing helps decrease the wild fire destruction of valuable ecosystems and habitat for a multitude of species including the Sage hen (Grouse).
Ranchers (food producers) seem to have few advocates, even though we enjoy the benefits of their labor, which include responsible range management.
We are, after all, talking about a long overdue gather; roundup if you prefer. Not genocide, execution, eradication, or equine abuse. The BLM has long ignored its responsibility as land managers and created grave financial peril for our law-abiding, fee-paying, food-producing neighbors - the ranchers, stewards of the range.
David Skelton
Lovelock[[In-content Ad]]
