Press Release from In Defense of Animals:
Calico Wild Horse Lawsuit Dismissed on Technicality, not Merits;
Government Evades Ruling on Illegality of Warehousing Wild Horses in the Midwest
Plaintiffs Promise To Continue Fight to Halt BLM Illegal Practices
Washington, D.C. (May 24, 2010) — Today, the Honorable Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court in Washington DC, dismissed on standing and mootness the lawsuit brought against U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) by animal protection organization In Defense of Animals (IDA), wildlife ecologist Craig Downer and children’s author Terri Farley. The Calico wild horse lawsuit has drawn intense public scrutiny to the government’s wild horse program and its routine policy of removing wild horses from their native western range on public lands and stockpiling them in long-term holding facilities in the Midwest, costing taxpayers of tens of millions of dollars annually.
The Calico lawsuit, filed pro bono by the law firm Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney (BIR), sought to stop the roundup of a proposed 2,500 wild horses from the half-million (500,000) acre herd management area complex, which is comprised primarily of publicly-owned lands. In a preliminary ruling, the Court agreed that the the government’s practice of sending wild horses to the Midwest and warehousing them in long-term holding facilities as likely illegal.
Today’s decision did not address the merits of that argument, only the lack of standing by plaintiffs to bring it. The Judge also ruled that the arguments challenging the roundup methods were moot because the roundup had already occurred.
“We remain confident in the merits of our case and look forward to pursuing this legal issue in the near future,” said William J. Spriggs, lead counsel for BIR in this case. “The BLM’s practice of removing horses from the western range and warehousing them in Midwestern holding facilities is flat out illegal, and the judge’s preliminary ruling in this regard was correct.”
The Calico Mountain Complex roundup of 1,922 wild horses is one of the largest roundups in recent years. The BLM removed at least 80-90 percent of the Calico wild horse population, leaving behind an “estimated” 600 horses on the 550,000 acre (or 859 square mile) Complex in northwest Nevada. The roundup ended on February 4, 2010, 500 horses short of its target for removal. The roundup proceeded despite a ruling by Judge Friedman suggesting that the BLM postpone the Calico roundup. To date, 97 horses have died during or after the roundup and more than 50 heavily pregnant mares have spontaneously aborted fetuses due to the stress of the roundup and holding.
Wild horses comprise a small fraction of grazing animals on public lands, where they are outnumbered by livestock nearly 50 to 1. The BLM has recently increased cattle grazing allotments in areas where wild horses are being removed. Currently the BLM manages more than 256 million acres of public lands of which cattle grazing is allowed on 160 million acres; wild horses are only allowed on 26.6 million acres this land, which must be shared with cattle. The Obama Administration plans to remove nearly 12,000 wild horses and burros from public lands by October 2010. There are currently more than 36,000 wild horses warehoused in government holding facilities and only 33,000 wild horses free on the range.
# # #
In Defense of Animals is an international animal protection organization located in San Rafael, Calif. dedicated to protecting animals’ rights, welfare, and habitat through education, outreach, and our hands-on rescue facilities in Mumbai, India, Cameroon, Africa, and rural Mississippi.
thecloudfoundation.wordpress.com 
May 24, 2010 at 11:46 pm |
Oh, for God’s sake! Now we get to start all over. Meanwhile, the roundups go on. By the time we get a ruling – ANY ruling – it’s going to be awfully late in the ball game.
I would post what I REALLY think, but it would have to be moderated out. DAMN!
May 24, 2010 at 11:51 pm |
This is inexcusable! BLM is tortureing our wild horses and they are dying. Where is the justice for our wild horses and burros. Did BLM buy the judges ruling? What was the tecnicality?
May 25, 2010 at 12:14 am |
I sort of understand the “moot point”, although I vehemently disagree. What I don’t understand is the “lack of standing by the plaintiffs”. What defines “standing” in the eyes of the court? Does an ordinary citizen of our so-called democracy/republic have “standing” in ANY case against the government?
Our country prides itself on being governed by a system of laws, but that does not and will never guarantee justice. This terrible setback proves that in spades!
May 25, 2010 at 12:21 am |
So does it need to be a class action brought by a multitude of tax payers? Thousands of plaintiffs who are outraged by the mismanagement of OUR wild horses?
Who would have standing? This is ridiculous!
Do we need petitions to put something on a ballot? What will it take to make them listen?
May 25, 2010 at 12:25 am |
There must be an explanation of the finding of a “lack of standing by the plaintiffs”. I want to read the actual court document. That lack of standing should have been noticed before now…
May 25, 2010 at 12:31 am |
This is a travesty! so what happens to these horses now?? they will not be set free, so where will all the older mares and stallions go? this makes me sick, this whole mess is jsut a travesty and BLM gets to keep on doing it,
May 25, 2010 at 2:06 am |
I commented on day one of the lawsuit it would fall on “Standing” it’s the Courts stop gap to save the day. I’ve been fighting a Clean Water Act case for 20 years and spent millions as a plaintiff who’s property and family’s health were ruined by toxic pollution. I ultimately lost the case on “Standing” because I moved my family off my property which became a Superfund site, thus lost “Standing” to sue. Some party must suffer an injury to bring a case and maintain it to keep “Standing.” Maybe the Cloud foundation needs to join the suit. But since the Mustangs have been removed the case can be considered moot unless some injury will harm the plaintiff if they remain in captivity. It’s really sick. Would some person have to remain at the scene of a car accident to maintain “Standing”?
May 25, 2010 at 2:11 am |
The part about not being able to do anything about the roundup since it was already over was the best part for me, this is not justice, the whole government is rotten, it is all about power and greed, this is a terrible statement about AMerica.
May 25, 2010 at 3:10 am
So if a robbery is already over it is moot and nothing can be done? I am sure robbers would love to hear this!
May 25, 2010 at 4:12 am
good point..LOL but in this case one is a criminal case and one is a civil case..We would have to file a criminal case of “Highway Robbery against the BLM.
May 25, 2010 at 2:11 am |
I am not a lawyer.. I believe standing is “privity” in other words, you have to show you (the plaintiff) are directly affected by the defendant’s actions. This was how the last case got dismissed.
Hopefully if there is another lawsuit, plaintiffs will be able to win an injunction; videos of suffering / starving foals at Fallon.
Kathy M – another thought – a class action suit for American citizens, money damages for loss of enjoyment. Two hours a week for 10 people to view defeated horses, some of them suffering and dying, is hardly equivalent to what we lost. 300,000,000 potential plaintiffs.
BLM won’t listen. They flaunt minimum standards of veterinary care, on camera.
May 25, 2010 at 2:16 am |
How does a class action suit begin?
May 25, 2010 at 3:18 am |
And this WAS a robbery wasn’t it, robbed the horses of their freedom, families and in too many cases, their lives, I guess the horses will have to sue them, as we can’t sue on their behalf, this is just another travesty.
May 25, 2010 at 1:06 pm |
I agree. I’d add that the horses are stolen from the American people as a whole. If the decision-makers at the BLM actually read comments from the public, they’d see that the overwhelming number disagree with round ups and promote range management options.
So, the people have spoken and continue to speak on the issue. What’s it going to take for the leaders in this country to get that?
May 25, 2010 at 3:24 am |
Standing as I understood it-was that you had to show you had actively gone out in the wild to view the horses and enjoy them..it is not enough to support them to get standing..Craig Downer would certainly qualify..and at the time of the lawsuit..the horses were still in the wild..the fact that it was the judges decision not to grant the injunction to prevent that removal..should not affect the standing..it is a moot point that the horses have been removed so that point cannot be adjudicated..However..someone…should have filed an amended complaint to satisfy that condition..someone blew it..
May 25, 2010 at 7:05 am |
agree with you. seems like is would have been a simple filing by the plaintiff’s lawyer. Also, shouldn’t he have been aware of the standing issue?
May 25, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
I totally agree, Sandra. Since when is “mental suffering” not considered in standing? Or didn’t the lawyer make this plain enough?
And HOW come he didn’t know to appeal the ruling against the preliminary injunction? The way I understand it, if there had been a appeal at the time, it would not now be moot. And, yeah, shouldn’t he have been aware of the standing issue?
Someone blew it all right…. I believe it was our attorney.
May 25, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
Should not the judge have been aware of the standing issue, as well as the DOJ attorneys? They could have filed for a dismissal on those grounds early in the game. That the ruling occurs so late seems odd. If anything, they all should have been aware.
May 25, 2010 at 3:29 am |
I am with you Jan..will look into the qualifications..Unfortunately class action suits take a long time to get to court..we may be out of horses by then..another moot point….
May 25, 2010 at 3:41 am |
I am sick at heart over this. I pray with everything I have that this travesty will galvanize all advocates and turn the hearts of others who have supported yet not really engaged with this issue so there is a huge groundswell vocal against the BLM and their torture and annihilation regime. I will continue to envision a hundred thousand people protesting non-stop over this cruel brutality, in front of every BLM office and in DC. We MUST NOT give up, no matter what. Evil can never win.
May 25, 2010 at 3:42 am |
In federal civil procedure law, which has also been accepted by approximately 35 states (through adoption of state civil procedure rules similar to the federal rules), the class action must have certain definite characteristics: (1) the class must be so large as to make individual suits impractical, (2) there must be legal or factual claims in common (3) the claims or defenses must be typical of the plaintiffs or defendants, and (4) the representative parties must adequately protect the interests of the class. These four requirements are often summarized as numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy. In many cases, the party seeking certification must also show (5) that common issues between the class and the defendants will predominate the proceedings, as opposed to individual fact-specific conflicts between class members and the defendants and (6) that the class action, instead of individual litigation, is a superior vehicle for resolution of the disputes at hand.
A quick read indicates the need to ask for compensatory damages(5 million to get to federal court..I am not sure they would address the claim of just returning the horses to the wild..would have to do more research..altho Brown vs the board of education dealt with discrimination in schools and not compensatory damages, but it was not a class action suit either…
May 25, 2010 at 4:08 am |
Please will someone contact the firm from idaho that represents the Western watersheds Project..They seem to have found the key to winning lawsuits against the BLM..They have the knowledge background experience and track record to get it done..at least point us in the right direction
May 25, 2010 at 5:25 am |
Almost all (if not all) of the successful suits brought by the Western Watersheds Project against the BLM or other governmental agencies have relied heavily upon the Endangered Species Act in combination with the National Environmental Protection Act and other laws dealing with land policy. This Calico suit did invoke NEPA in some way–I can’t remember specifically without looking back at the filing articles. Anyway, the wild horses are not an endangered species, so that takes away considerable clout when any entity is attempting to advocate for them as a group. When I researched this stuff a couple of months ago, I thought the best way to help the horses in a suit was if they shared land/habitat with an endangered species so that their legal needs could be combined. As we all know, most of the time the horses are accused of being destructive villains of resources for other animals, which sort of creates a “catch 22” situation. We can contact the firm, but I know their strength comes largely from the ability to use the Endangered Species Act.
May 25, 2010 at 10:25 pm
“Anyway, the wild horses are not an endangered species…”
In context of their history, they are fast becoming one, if we want to use the word “wild.”
May 25, 2010 at 4:52 am |
This is the most complete report on the dismissal I’ve found so far. It’s upset me more than anything else I’ve read, and it won’t take much imagination to understand why.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/may/24/federal-judge-dismisses-nevada-horse-roundup-suit/
May 25, 2010 at 5:32 am |
Very scary!
May 25, 2010 at 5:47 am |
But Friedman said the plaintiffs failed to show how sending the horses to other facilities would cause harm to themselves.
“The closest the plaintiffs come to such an explanation is their assertion that transfer to the long-term holding facilities in the Midwest would permanently remove the gathered Calico wild horses from their home on the range,” the judge wrote.
OK-this is where the judge assumes the plaintiffs have lost standing…When in fact we are not allowed to even view the horses in the long term facilitys..they are on private land.and removed forever from the american citizens right to enjoy
May 25, 2010 at 6:22 am |
Is it then a matter of proving that the horses would not adapt away from the range? I am trying to understand the judge’s statement.
May 25, 2010 at 7:06 am
I think the judge blew it on that one as the law clearly states they cannot be removed to a place where they do not currently reside.ie., sanctuaries in the midwest. These are western horses.
May 25, 2010 at 6:57 am |
“…The Judge also ruled that the arguments challenging the roundup methods were moot because the roundup had already occurred…”
So what have been all the court dates and when did the roundup start? Isn’t this “moot”, being the horses are already rounded up and in holding, only because “the judge” postponed his decision?????????
We are all understandably horrified by this, but it is what it is. Either take this to a higher court or wait for the next opportunity to sue? Or both? Of course, continue to fight everyway possible!
From the bottom of my heart and soul I want to thank Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney (BIR), Criag Downer and Terry Farley. You did not lose, rather the system did not work. Your efforts have and will continue to feed our spirits and work onward.
May 25, 2010 at 7:08 am |
Is this saying that the only way to stop these round ups is to actually stop the round ups before they occur? I have no idea. I am lost in this ruling and the court arguments.
May 25, 2010 at 7:16 am
I know, this part seems like an unsurmountable catch 22. But every time we lose we gain insight as to how to win. Thats the only way I can view this at this time. My mind is realing from shock. Legislation is what we need.
May 25, 2010 at 2:14 pm
It sure seems to point that way.
May 25, 2010 at 7:12 am |
And William J. Spriggs s lead council.
May 25, 2010 at 1:40 pm |
Yes, Roxy, I was thinking maybe it can be appealed to a higher court as well. I’m sure the plaintiffs and attorneys are scrambling to make a new plan of action.
May 25, 2010 at 7:44 am |
WHY DO WE KEEP GETTING THE SAME JUDGE?
May 25, 2010 at 3:01 pm |
Louie, This entire action was originated and moved forward (more aptly backward) in Judge Friedman’s court. It was all part of this one case. Last year’s Colorado Wild Horse and Burro Coalition, Inc. v. Salazar, No. 06-1609 (DDC 2009), where U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer found for the plaintiffs and against the BLM is one of the few actions where the judge quotes the Wild Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act as though it is actually a law, a law that is enforceable. That this law is a tool for the protection of the horses (similar to the Endangered Species Act for other species) seems to be irrelevant in some of these decisions. (Judge Collyer’s remarks are printed in Laura Allen’s Animal Law Coalition piece from October 28, 2009.) The Calico case should be appealed or reworked and filed again, hopefully before a new judge.
May 25, 2010 at 7:45 am |
LET’S SUE THEM AGAIN.
May 25, 2010 at 7:49 am |
WILD HORSE ANNIE HAD SOME DISAPPOINTMENTS, ALSO. SHE KEPT ON. LET’S TAKE IT TO A HIGHER COURT. WE CAN ALL DONATE TO THE CAUSE.
May 25, 2010 at 8:10 am |
WHEN WAS A PUBLIC MEETING HELD?
Does the public have input regarding the use of helicopters and motorized vehicles in managing wild horses and burros?
Yes, Section 9 of the 1971 Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, requires that a public hearing be held prior to the use of helicopters and motorized vehicles. Hearings are held annually. The purpose of the hearings is to hear public concerns so that BLM can review its standard operating procedures to assure animals are treated humanely. The BLM Nevada State Office held a public hearing on May 20, 2009. BLM reviewed its standard operating procedures in response to the views and issues raised at that public meeting and determined that no changes to the Standard Operating Procedures were warranted.
May 25, 2010 at 8:12 am |
GUESS I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION.
HOW WAS THE PUBLIC NOTIFIED?
May 25, 2010 at 1:19 pm |
this is a question for every one. I have heard several stories recently of adopted mustangs who reacted badly to the sound or sight of a helicopter after being rounded up and even after being trained into sound riding animals. Some people have been injured as a result of the dust ups. Is this a proof of injury the lawyer could use? If the round up creates a fear buried in the hte horses mind that makes it an unstable riding animal and the animal is then “adopted” to an unknowing public, does that constitute injury?
Why can’t the BLM use bait trapping which by their own studies is cheaper and less harmful tothe horses, sort out the younger animals that ARE more readily adoptable, and apply whatever birth control is needed even to the extent of gelding or neuter some of the mares if there is no natural predation to control the herd growth and then turn the older horses back out on their ranges. Most adopters are not able or willing to handle a five or ten year old horse who is taken off the range, but lots of people can work with a yearling. If the horses are truly overpopulating their ranges, (and I am not sure that is the case,) wouldn’t it make sense to only take the ones that could be adopted and let the rest run free?
May 25, 2010 at 3:43 pm |
Yep, unstable horses dangerous, (domestic horses, included). I was at a BLM adoption event last month. All the “good-looking” horses were adopted and gone first thing. The “others” who were were left were plain and not very “Mustangy” looking. A couple of them had very poor confirmation, why drag these poor horses around? Why not bring ONLY HIGHLY ADOPTABLE horses to these events?
May 25, 2010 at 4:17 pm |
Plastic bags on whips are also used to chase horses or to move them into chutes, etc. VERY bad idea. The use of these is seen in multiple videos. Imagine how terrfied these animals become of something as simple as a plastic bag… Purposely terrifying animals is abuse and very hard to undo, which is something I’ve learned from personal experience with one of my own horses.
May 25, 2010 at 9:02 pm |
I disagee that older horses are ‘too wild’ because I adopted a 4 year old and tamed and trained him myself.
The REAL problem is that the BLM is NOT up front about the abuse the animals have suffered so the adopters are fully informed about what they’re taking on. I had to learn by trial that my horse was nervous about men and would react in terror to things hitting him on the behind. Since he was also one who refused to be forced into anything, I think its probable he got the cattle prod a time or two. But that didn’t make him ‘too wild’ to be adopted…it meant he was abused. He reacted just like an abused domestic horse would.
I also disagree that the ‘ugly’ and plain horses shouldn’t have a chance at adoption because there are people who can look past that. My horse was a plain brown-bay and the most wonderful horse ever. If I hadn’t gotten him, I probably would have adopted the rangy, ugly mare with a knot on one hip in the next pen. In fact I still wonder what happened to her and would like to know if she’s still available should I get some land in the next few years.
May 25, 2010 at 11:17 pm |
The BLM in New Mexico DOES use bail trapping for this very reason, plus they keep the bands together until they decide which ones will be returned to the range. I’m liking New Mexico more and more every day, so much so that is my next vacation destination. This info is from recent blogs from New Mixco BLM at R.T.s site. So not every state agency is the same.
Certainly some horses are going to be more popular for adoption due to markings, age and presentation. Sorry, but that is the way it is. Then there are others of us that take the ones, talking dogs now, with little, and some big “imperfections” knowing they have littler chance of adoption – and I can attest to what the others are missing out on – its not what is on the outside, they are all have beautiful hearts and character on the inside. I have, at times, felt like I was conducting a doggie hospice!
May 25, 2010 at 1:49 pm |
Wow! what a dissapointment! I had such hopes of them having to release all the Calico horses back to their land. Is there a way to sue on the fact of the horrible animal abuses that have occured and occure everyday as more and more suffer and die? Where can we donate to keep this fight going? Why is not anyone listening to their cries?
May 25, 2010 at 3:33 pm |
I know the humane society (Humboldt County?) has got to be aware of the abuse and neglect at Fallon. Are they investigating? Clearly multiple violations going on there.
May 25, 2010 at 3:43 pm |
TCF’s article on the death of the emaciated foal states that the local sheriff’s office is now investigating–Churchill or Washoe County? (See the previous blog story.)
May 25, 2010 at 3:48 pm |
I thought I read that somewhere. What about the multiple “fractured necks” “found dead in pens” “died while giving birth” ? The BLM facility is clearly under staffed. What about a state lawsuit?
May 25, 2010 at 3:58 pm |
Yeah, well, many of us have suggested “local” intervention by several agencies, but have consistently been told that they have no jurisdiction or authority over the BLM and their practices. So, I was surprised to read that the sheriff was now involved…
May 25, 2010 at 4:50 pm
That’s a load of BULL SH*T! More like COP OUT!
May 25, 2010 at 4:32 pm |
There is now DNA proof that the wild horses are native to North America. Would this be enough to win them protection or be considered an endangered species since the BLM is eradicating them?
May 25, 2010 at 4:43 pm |
That research was actually presented to Congress within the last few years. It doesn’t seem to be making a difference. Here is a link to the Congressional document.
Click to access Wild_Horses_as_Native_North_American_Wildlife.pdf
May 25, 2010 at 4:52 pm |
There was a Supreme court case that stated the wild horses were “wildlife” and upheld that point specifically by the 10th court of appeals, in their decision. There mightt be something to work in that angle.
May 25, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Do you have a case name or number? I scrolled through several pages of 10th Court of Appeals cases and didn’t see a “wildlife” reference. (I’m always interested in reading an actual document.) Thanks.
May 25, 2010 at 6:25 pm
Here is the 10th court case of appeals, in it is cited the supreme court decision on Kleppe vs NM, for further reading..
http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cases/wild/hodel.htm
May 25, 2010 at 6:57 pm
Thanks, that is detailed, and I will read more in depth this P.M. It seems clearly to say that the horses are “wild” and therefore not to be distinguished from other “wild”life, among other things. An attorney might be able to “work that angle”, as you said.
May 25, 2010 at 4:57 pm |
My concern is-unless we can get a judge to issue injunctions on the upcoming roundups…ALL of them..the horses will be long gone..and in holding before the courts can adjudicate a case or an appeal can be heard.
I say we fight each and every pending roundup by filing a suit..we tie them up on everyone..Make it tough for the BLM to do business.
May 25, 2010 at 5:19 pm |
I totally agree. I think that’s what IDA and counsel have been doing and intend to continue doing. If the BLM has to address every action, the paperwork alone would become quite tedious. IDA, Spriggs, et al have asserted all along that they are in this for the long haul.
May 25, 2010 at 5:10 pm |
I agree Sandra. Hit them with lawsuits.
May 25, 2010 at 6:13 pm |
I have what I call “the spotted owl theory”. Every forest-has a spotted owl..probably-none of us will ever see one and would not have known it existed..but for the fact..that ..lumber companies continued to clear cut the forests-had they..on their own..decided to manage their timber harvesting in a way that was environmentally friendly-there never would have been a need for the spotted owl issue…In WWP lawsuits..its the sage grouse..Its the means to an end..no disrespect meant to the sage grouse..insert BLM for timber companies…
May 25, 2010 at 6:35 pm |
SANDRA, I’M WITH YOU ON THAT. TIE UP EACH ONE, AND KEEP GATHERING EVIDENCE AND SUPPORT. WE’RE IN THIS FAR–LET’S KEEP GOING AND AS TRACIE SAID, TURN UP THE MUSIC.
May 25, 2010 at 6:37 pm |
THERE IS ALSO GROWING PROOF THAT THE ROUND-UPS ACTUALLY MAKE THE HERDS DOUBLE. WE HAVE A LOT MORE NOW THAN WHEN WE STARTED.
May 25, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
I think we need to focus on proving the BLM is NOT performing..”multiple Use”..but is managing that phrase to exclude the horses..WWP has done all the leg work and PROVED that in court..The cattle are in fact destroying the rangelands and water sources..where they are EXCLUSIVELY using millions of acres of fenced allotments..You can cite everyone of their lawsuits as evidence of general malfiecience, a pattern of behavior to support your contention.
May 25, 2010 at 7:11 pm |
Yes! Laura Allen has written that the “multiple use” concept in the Federal Land Policy Management Act is being used by the BLM to exclude horses from their own ranges, while ignoring the Wild Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act entirely. That generalized interpretation of “wildlife” as referenced in the Kleppe case might be the link between sage grouse and horses, and the WWP work could pull it all together.
May 25, 2010 at 8:49 pm |
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME THAN NOW. THE PUBLIC IS THOROUGHLY DISGUSTED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. ALL THAT LIVE ON THE GULF COAST WOULD SIGN ON WITH US.
BLM EMPLOYEES ARE NOT HAPPY CAMPERS, EITHER. THEY PROBABLY SIGNED ON THINKING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO ACTUALLY HELP PROTECT PUBLIC LANDS–NOT BE USED BY BIG MONEY AND SPECIAL INTERESTS.
WATCH OUT FOR DIVERSIONARY TACTICS.
May 25, 2010 at 9:02 pm |
So true!
May 25, 2010 at 11:19 pm |
I am devastated by the news that the federal judge dismissed the case. I had so hoped and prayed that the Calico horses would be returned to their rangeland. What happens to the horses now? Wasn’t the original BLM plan to process them for an adoption event in July? I find it extremely doubtful that BLM will offer all 1,800 for adoption. Does anyone know what will happen to those considered too old, too lame, too plain, etc? Will they be held at the Fallon facility for the rest of their days? Also, since the case was dismissed, can the BLM go ahead and geld the older stallions, like Tomahawk?
May 25, 2010 at 11:24 pm |
As far as I know under current law all horses over 10 years (?) or 3 strikes out for adoption can be sold without limitation to kill buyers. Those not sold will be held in concentration camps indefinatly, or until BLM figures out a way to euthanize them all, as they have attempted to do in the past.
May 26, 2010 at 12:35 am |
On the BLM site, there is a sales authoruty link, you can get truckloads of these horses, with a disclaimer on the BOS that the buyer agrees to not knowingly sell them for commercial use, and there are a lot of roundups now planned for this year, with more of the same for the horses, this is all insane,
May 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm |
This is an issue that we need to take on..something of this nature came up the other day at an adoption..We need individuals who go to these adoptions to get license plates numbers of trucks and trailers loaded with horses..For privacy reasons, the BLM will not devulge who these people are..we need a tracking system..a list of buyers who are kill buyers, we need to circulate it..communities tend to know who these people are..They may be sending decoys in to buy horses..Beware of trailers loaded with “big” heavy horses..killbuyers will try to get those first.
May 26, 2010 at 2:16 am |
Post: Judge Friedman “Rules in Favor of BLM” in Calico Lawsuit, May 24, 2010… Reaction of BLM Director to Judge Friedman’s Ruling,
Includes pdf file of the judgement from this case.
T.
May 26, 2010 at 4:02 am |
Call me paranoid, but there’s a distinct possibility the BLM was monitoring the wild horse advocates’ blogs, evidenced by their uncharacteristically quick amendments to the Calico Gather Updates. Once bitten, twice shy, if you catch my drift.
I’ve read some good ideas and well-researched information on several of the blogs. In my opinion, anyone who has found something TRULY VALUABLE to this case or for building another (a legal precedent, for instance) should forward that information PRIVATELY to an advocate they trust.
No sense giving the enemy (I’m done calling the BLM the “opposition”!) any more bullets to kill our wild ones.
May 27, 2010 at 12:57 am |
They didn’t have to monitor the blogs..not that they don’t..they were backed up with phone calls e-mails and FOI requests..LOL..I think the fact that we are doing research and making clear consise and informed statements..is making them nervous, and putting pressure on them…I have seen no “trade” secrets divulged. Much is going on behind the scences that is not being discussed online.
May 27, 2010 at 1:17 am
I realize much is going on that I’m not privy to, which is fine with me, because I’ve got my own little project going on. I’m sure those who are in the loop are certainly more knowledgeable than I am. Cross fingers something works.
May 27, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Everyday I meet people who are totally unaware of what is going on with the BLM and the wild horses..The nuts and bolts issues..The elements that are truly driving these roundups..It is our job to inform people, no better way to reach people than the blogs..We donot have the media coverage..Imagine if the horses story was out there every day like the gulf oil spill. A small group of advocates will not win this-it takes public support of a large group of citizens to make government sit up and take action.
May 26, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
KAREN, YOU ARE RIGHT AND WISE TO ADVISE THAT. I DON’T THINK ANYTHING HAS BEEN GIVEN ON THESE SITES THAT WOULD DAMAGE THE LAWSUIT. WHAT THEY WOULD READ IS MAINLY OUR OPINIONS–AND PLENTY OF THAT. ANY REAL INFO IS KEPT UNDER WRAPS AND GIVEN ONLY TO TRUSTED ADVOCATES.
May 27, 2010 at 12:02 am |
I finally get it. Salazar is a genius. Since the world is at or past “peak oil” he purposely has allowed the Gulf drillers to make a mess while at the same time rounding up all our Mustangs. Soon everyone will need a horse. Salazar will make billions.
May 28, 2010 at 7:54 am |
AT THIS POINT, HE IS A LIABILITY TO THE PRESIDENT.
May 28, 2010 at 11:47 pm |
On the subject of the horses as “wildlife”, I just purchased a DVD “Back to the Wild” on the Wild Horses of Assateague. This DVD is a presentation of the National Park Service, U.S.Department of the Interior.
On the back cover it states,”The National Park Service manages the Maryland herd as wildlife to roam freely across the seashore landscape. Many bands live in full view of the public, yet their daily lives remain a mystery. Discover the hidden lives of Assateague’s wild horses and return with them “Back to the Wild”
Maybe we should send a copy to the BLM?
May 29, 2010 at 2:12 am |
That’s a good idea; but Buchanan, Ingersoll and Rooney need new avenues for thought as well. Maybe William Spriggs could glean a fresh strategy from the Park Service’s designation of the horses as wildlife…
May 30, 2010 at 5:10 am |
IF THEY ARE MONITORING THE BLOGS ON THE WEEK-ENDS AND HOLIDAYS THEY ARE GETTING PAID OVERTIME.