Post by qhflicka on Jul 27, 2009 19:51:04 GMT -5
Wild horses beget wildly excessive legislation
This editorial appears in the July 24, 2009, Yakima Herald-Republic.
A year ago, one of our newspaper photographers took a picture that quickly became a favorite among our readers. The photo captured a herd of wild horses galloping along U.S. Highway 97 south of Toppenish. It's a picturesque vision of what many of us imagine the Wild West must have been -- mustangs running free against a backdrop of rolling hills.
But romantic visions of the past often clash with present-day realities. That's true with the fate of wild horses in the West, and it's a debate our 4th District congressman has entered with unaccustomed bravado. We are rooting for him on this issue, and hope he prevails.
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Pasco, is leading the opposition to legislation that seeks to protect wild horses and burros under federal care. Backers of the measure say it will allow more room for these animals to roam and will bolster the Bureau of Land Management's wild horse and burro adoption program with new provisions. The bill also bans the commercial slaughter of these animals, something that high-profile animal rights supporters -- including Willie Nelson and Bo Derek -- have long advocated.
Hastings isn't buying any of this hype. In fact, he calls the bill "a new $700 million welfare program for wild horses" and condemns its potential fiscal impact in the face of a looming $1 trillion federal deficit.
Here are the highlights of the measure, which:
* Requires a wild horse census every two years.
* Provides enhanced contraception and birth control for the wild horses.
* Seeks the acquisition of 19 million acres of public and private lands to provide the horses a place to roam. This amount of land would replace the habitat lost from the original 52 million acres set aside by the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act.
* Requests $5 million a year to repair damage caused by the wild horses on the federal land.
* Proposes home inspections of those wanting to adopt a wild horse.
When speaking recently on the House floor against the legislation, Hastings took great delight in pointing out the absurdity of the land purchase: "Taxpayers are being asked to buy up millions of acres of land for the enjoyment of wild horses, and then taxpayers will have to pay $5 million a year to repair the damage that these horses will do to these lands. Only in Washington, D.C., does this make sense."
It certainly makes no sense out here in the West, where wild horses have caused excessive damage to fragile rangelands and to salmon-rearing streams. These herds are a particular nuisance in Indian Country, where an estimated 20,000 wild mustangs in Washington, Idaho and Oregon are ruining medicinal plants and depleting other forage for wildlife.
Since the wild horses have no natural predators and their numbers have far exceeded their natural habitat's ability to support them, the situation is only going to get worse, especially when factoring in the annual foal crop that raises the population by 20 percent a year.
A bill in 2007 that cleared the House would have banned the sale or slaughter of the wild horses. It was one page long and would have cost $500,000 a year. The measure never made it out of the Senate.
What a difference two years make. With its potential $700 million cost, the new legislation goes far beyond the limited ban on the commercial slaughter of horses. We join Hastings and urge lawmakers to just say "Whoa!"
Indeed, herds of wild horses require more prudent management, but this is not the way to go. Proper culling of the ever-burgeoning populations of wild horses may be a necessary requirement. Tribal officials are considering that approach. However, with the closure of the nation's last three slaughterhouses two years ago, that remedy may be difficult to attain in the near future.
What we don't need is to acquire more land to accommodate more wild horses that no one seems to want -- not even Mother Nature.
This editorial appears in the July 24, 2009, Yakima Herald-Republic.
A year ago, one of our newspaper photographers took a picture that quickly became a favorite among our readers. The photo captured a herd of wild horses galloping along U.S. Highway 97 south of Toppenish. It's a picturesque vision of what many of us imagine the Wild West must have been -- mustangs running free against a backdrop of rolling hills.
But romantic visions of the past often clash with present-day realities. That's true with the fate of wild horses in the West, and it's a debate our 4th District congressman has entered with unaccustomed bravado. We are rooting for him on this issue, and hope he prevails.
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Pasco, is leading the opposition to legislation that seeks to protect wild horses and burros under federal care. Backers of the measure say it will allow more room for these animals to roam and will bolster the Bureau of Land Management's wild horse and burro adoption program with new provisions. The bill also bans the commercial slaughter of these animals, something that high-profile animal rights supporters -- including Willie Nelson and Bo Derek -- have long advocated.
Hastings isn't buying any of this hype. In fact, he calls the bill "a new $700 million welfare program for wild horses" and condemns its potential fiscal impact in the face of a looming $1 trillion federal deficit.
Here are the highlights of the measure, which:
* Requires a wild horse census every two years.
* Provides enhanced contraception and birth control for the wild horses.
* Seeks the acquisition of 19 million acres of public and private lands to provide the horses a place to roam. This amount of land would replace the habitat lost from the original 52 million acres set aside by the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act.
* Requests $5 million a year to repair damage caused by the wild horses on the federal land.
* Proposes home inspections of those wanting to adopt a wild horse.
When speaking recently on the House floor against the legislation, Hastings took great delight in pointing out the absurdity of the land purchase: "Taxpayers are being asked to buy up millions of acres of land for the enjoyment of wild horses, and then taxpayers will have to pay $5 million a year to repair the damage that these horses will do to these lands. Only in Washington, D.C., does this make sense."
It certainly makes no sense out here in the West, where wild horses have caused excessive damage to fragile rangelands and to salmon-rearing streams. These herds are a particular nuisance in Indian Country, where an estimated 20,000 wild mustangs in Washington, Idaho and Oregon are ruining medicinal plants and depleting other forage for wildlife.
Since the wild horses have no natural predators and their numbers have far exceeded their natural habitat's ability to support them, the situation is only going to get worse, especially when factoring in the annual foal crop that raises the population by 20 percent a year.
A bill in 2007 that cleared the House would have banned the sale or slaughter of the wild horses. It was one page long and would have cost $500,000 a year. The measure never made it out of the Senate.
What a difference two years make. With its potential $700 million cost, the new legislation goes far beyond the limited ban on the commercial slaughter of horses. We join Hastings and urge lawmakers to just say "Whoa!"
Indeed, herds of wild horses require more prudent management, but this is not the way to go. Proper culling of the ever-burgeoning populations of wild horses may be a necessary requirement. Tribal officials are considering that approach. However, with the closure of the nation's last three slaughterhouses two years ago, that remedy may be difficult to attain in the near future.
What we don't need is to acquire more land to accommodate more wild horses that no one seems to want -- not even Mother Nature.
