In the second part we discussed the development and problems associated with the Adopt a Wild Horse or Burro Program. In this part we will discuss how unscrupulous individuals on both sides of the issue have twisted the facts to benefit themselves at the expense of the wild horses

News reports about abuses of America's wild horses, whether real or imagined, sold newspapers. If a horse was injured or died while in BLM care, it became bigger than life. Never mind the statistical fact that modern BLM handling techniques result in fewer "losses" than in the average domestic horse populations, which in of itself is an outstanding feat. We have to remember that no horse management program of this scale had ever been attempted before, yet in spite of this overwhelming task and their making significant advances in the knowledge and techniques involving managing and "domesticating" wild horses and burros, making the BLM out to be the bad guys sold papers and attracted television viewers and that's what the reporters jumped on.

Thousands of hours of efforts expended by BLM staff, and more importantly, volunteer support groups, hardly received any notice, however the losses of a small number of animals in a blizzard at Elk Creek, Nebraska made front page news in spite of the fact that literally thousands of farm and range animals died in the region. It's unfortunate that these losses occurred, but where is the perspective?

Even more disgusting has been a few "humane" groups (some of whom I have contributed to in the past) who used unverified false information gleaned from newspaper articles to generate a "tissue issue" in order to line their own coffers. "Prevent the wholesale slaughter of America's wild horses! Join the campaign." Check the box, "Yes, I will contribute..." You know the pitch. Unfortunately, such irresponsible actions gave even more credibility to this stack of errant press accounts. (While I don't expect the press to research every detail of a story, although probably they should, I do expect an organization who is asking for my money to be responsible and authenticate any claims it makes in its effort to motivate the American public to send them money!)

The negative spinoffs have been staggering and the horses have lost. Many management practices which have benefitted both the horses and adopters have been changed. Efforts to educate and better prepare adopters for receiving, gentling and caring for their newly acquired wild horses have suffered while the BLM struggled to defend itself as the press was obsessed with the pyramid of misconception that it had built and now felt compelled to maintain. The adoption process was working and not only were most of the horses becoming assimilated into domestic life and being well cared for, many American citizens were learning first hand about these magnificent creatures and valuing their continued presence in the habitat management areas.

On the sidelines sat the cattle interests. Those operations which benefit from taxpayer-subsidized grazing leases have a significant financial interest in reducing the numbers of horses under protection. It is only natural that a few of them would throw support behind groups or causes which would discredit the BLM and erode Congress' confidence in wild horse management, and which perhaps could trigger the undoing of wild horse protections. While many of us are active in attempting to shore up wild horse management and oversight, some very powerful interests are working to undo all of this. (Please note that only a small percentage of America's beef is "range grown" and a number of taxpayer subsidized range operations are actually owned by foreign corporations, and that many of the "family ranch" leasees are actually fairly horse friendly.)

Recently an even darker side of the picture has emerged. Some animal rights zealots have, based on press reports and sleazy humane group sales pitches, taken actions of their own. In the predawn hours of November 29, 1997, arsonists burned the BLM's Burns, Oregon wild horse and burro holding facility to the ground. In doing so they injured a number of horses and as of this writing, BLM officials are worried that a few pregnant mares, some from genetically rare herds, will likely abort their foals as a result. Additionally, the BLM wranglers who work with mostly their own gear lost all of their personal property along with important BLM owned horse handling and medical equipment. (Click Here to read the news account of the fire.)

How is all of this helping the horses?

In summary,

• Do America's wild horses need to be managed? Absolutely.

• Does the BLM do a good job? Considering the staggering magnitude and huge numbers of horses involved, they do just about as good a job as any organization could; not perfect, but certainly adequate.

• Are improvements needed? Certainly. Discovering problems and making improvements is a normal process in any endeavor, especially in one as large as this.

• Does the "Adopt a Wild Horse or Burro" program work? Check out the Mustang Gallery and see for yourself!

We hope this "editorial viewpoint," which is based on our own research and personal experiences, provides you with some perspective and encourages you to seek out the truth about wild horse management and "wild horse rights" issues for yourself!

Have any comments? Email us!