We now have coverage in so many places, big and small, what a boost for the horses, and less BLM myths and lies. Tho’ a friend sent me a reply from Senator
Joe Lieberman, Connecticut, and all he could do was quote BLM. I told her we should have a rebuttle letter for her so she can use what BLM/Senator has said to straighten them out. This is all I get from Senators here in Colorado, too. At first they did not give a subject to the form letter. Now the form letter is about the wild horses and burros but is phrased in BLMese. Not good enough. That they reiterate lies is sad for any of us to get from our elected officials. Has anyone got their representatives to make a pro ROAM change or decision? mar
I got a personal reply from Senator Evan Bayh, who cosponsored the humane transportation bill in the Senate and has voted anti-slaughter when he’s had a chance. He supported S 2996 also.
He reiterated his anti-slaughter and cruelty stance, and said if ROAM gets to the floor, he will give it due consideration. Not a commitment, but he really can’t do that until he’s read the final version. I would expect he would support it – if he gets the chance.
I will continue to “educate” him about wild horse issues and the insanity of Salazar’s Plot. Oops! I mean Plan.
Missouri’s Senator Bond occupies several pertinent committees. I urge you to write him in this (these) capacities; both on humane transport bills and investigation of BLM issues, as well as S.B. 1579 I need to find out if he cosponsors any of these bills (esp humane transport — don’t know)
Here’s a link to the committees/subcommittees he is on – it is one page, easy to read. I know he is ranking member of the subcommittee on transportation.
I have been send letters to both my Missouri senators regularly; but if I can get permission from Laura Allen to use her letter on “Call to Investigation of BLM” I will send it to Bond, along with request on humane transportation, etc.
mar, nothing. nada. kerry hasn’t responded. we’ve been nearly every day for over 2 months now. nada. kirk (the temp holding teddy’s open spot until we have our election in december) hasn’t responded but i don’t expect him to. i have received a few automated responses from other senators, all talking about health care & the war in afghanistan. i did receive one canned response from someone else (senator landrieu, perhaps?) stating that they received my letter, were glad to know that i supported animal rights, & they were taking my views into consideration. no commitment. nothing to make me think that any actions were taking place. other than that, not a single peep from anyone. nada. zip. same with the letters to the media. the only people i’ve heard from were my local pbs stations (i wrote to them to ask if they would carry the first 2 cloud shows on tv before the 3rd installment was to air). i received not one but THREE responses, stating that their schedules were already set, they couldn’t air the 2 shows, but i could watch them online. thanks for watching & would you like to donate to pbs? that was about it. i’m sending another round of letters today…..
Well, This was par for the course with the wolves and the buffalo the past few years, too. If these elected officials were taught that they need to respond and to reconsider or consider ideas that come from the people it would make a difference. The people in their face are lobbyists. When the blog began I did not think we needed to go that route but it seems we may need to consider it. But that would mean major backing, too. Why should a movement of the people have to become a special interest group?? Just because the elected officials need that kind of approach? They are concerned with many things, but this should be one of them. I know we will not stop and we will not be ignored either. There are more people learning about this all the time. They need news of what is happening to the horses. Are we able to do all this? If not what do we need to accomplish more? mar
Glad to finally see some main stream coverage of the wild horse situation. May I offer a suggestion on contacting congress critters? Maybe they are so “over-whelmed” by current issues that we should ask them to “find out information” for us concerning the wild-horse situation. As I have pouring over mounds of information a couple of sentences have stood out. In the 2008 GAO the statement is made that the BLM is currently compiling a history of how BLM field offices made the determination to manage wild horses and burros on the current 34.3 million acres, compared to the 53.5 million acres where they were originally found in 1971. According to BLM officials they expect the review to be completed by March 2009″ Question to Congress critter–where is BLM’s review? Statement to Congress Critter–wouldn’t it be a lot cheaper to put horses back where they belong—even if there would have to be a hay drop than to continue rounding up and holding horses until they die. It is a given fact that horses live longer in domestic captivity than in the wild. ECONOMICS should be stressed. Hit them with the $–
Also according to the 1971 Act, under certain circumstances, the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture may designate and maintain specific ranges on public lands as sanctuaries for the protection and preservation of wil free-roaming horses and burros. 16 U.S.C. 1333(c). BLM can also choose to close appropriate areas of public lands to grazing use by all or a particular kind of livestock, if necessary, to provide habitat for wild horses or burros; to implement herd management actions; or to protect wild horses or burros from disease, harassment, or injury.-43 C.F.R. 4710.5
Barbara, Excellent points— put some fact-finding responsibility on the elected “Congress critters”. Perhaps their research staffers can actually discern some information and educate their respective offices. Yes, there are many instances in the original 1971 Act where the BLM “can” or “may” choose to do things, or “is authorized” to do something, and in all this time those things have not been done. Many of the changes in language in the ROAM Act are simply removing the words “can” or “may” and inserting the word “required” so that there will not be so much discretionary lack of action. I am hoping that Sen. Landrieu and the other committee members are truly researching the original Act, its intent, and how that can be maintained and strengthened by ROAM. If she does an adequate job of pulling it all together, then I believe she will do a thorough and reasonably passionate presentation when she brings the bill to the Senate floor. (That, in and of itself, will be an education for most of the Senators.)
barb warner just posted some things on a yahoo groups website that i follow. it has 2 documents that shelly sawhook & cindy macdonald created for their recent trip to washington, dc. barb said that they will be available later on her website, a voice for our horses at http://www.vickitobin.com/ go to the wild horse section. they should also be available later at shelly’s blog & website http://saveourwildhorses.blogspot.com/.
one document is the save our wild horses point paper, & the other is the pros & cons of salazar’s plan. i think that these may have been discussed on last week’s radio show. barb says that you can use the points in your correspondence with congressmen (& whomever else you are writing to).
please check them out!
Some of what you said (spec. the 16 U.S.C. 1333) I heard a lady say to the public Advisory Meeting of 8/08 that was on Horse Power website, as an idea that BLM hadn’t discussed. I listened to Part II of that meeting and several people made excellent points. I am beginning to wonder if the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 as amended isn’t one of the greatest legislative culprits in all this, and this is what actually needs to be changed. Otherwise the unrestricted competition will always be there. If you check the Wikipedia article on the Taylor Grazing Act, it gives you the parentage of the Bureau of Land Management.
According to this, the BLM’s management of the land is required to best reflect the requirements of the American public.
Now, how can they do that if they are not listening to the American Public due to the nature of their Advisory Board, the one and only public input source “the public” has at its disposal?
With The Taylor Act (mother of the FLPMA), according to the Wikipedia article, some observed the governing board was made up of the very people the Act was supposed to govern. This cozy little set up has apparently been perpetuated (going ‘way back to 1934 apparently) since the current Advisory Board seems to be heavily weighted with the selfsame interests that inhabited the board back the the old days.
Federal Land Policy Management Act, or FLPMA (Pub.L. 94-579), is a United States federal law that governs the way in which the public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management are managed. The law was enacted in 1976 by the 94th Congress. In the FLPMA, Congress recognized the value of the public lands, declaring that these lands would remain in public ownership. Congress used the term “multiple use” management, defined as “management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people.” It is found in the United States Code under Title 43.
The “needs of the american people” have expanded to include natural resources such as oil, as explained in the following article: include Federal Land Use Policy Act of 1976
P.S There’s a new article on the blog up there above the Fitch article.
Oh, the comment about the governing board, MW? That’s in the Taylor Grazing Act Wikipedia Article:
“During the administration of President Herbert Hoover, it became clear that federal regulation of public land use was needed. Since vast portions were used for livestock grazing, the importance of range management loomed large.
Congressman Don B. Colton of Utah introduced a bill to create grazing districts, but the bill failed to pass the US Senate. In 1933, Representative Taylor re-introduced the Colton bill as the Taylor bill. This bill set up the grazing bureau or service in the Department of Interior to administer the range lands. The Grazing Service was merged with the General Land Office in 1946 to form the Bureau of Land Management
Cases studies by Phillip O. Foss of the role of local grazing advisory committees established by the Taylor Grazing Act in regulating the grazing of livestock on federal public lands found that such committees were often dominated by the same ranchers and cattlemen whose activities were supposed to be regulated, raising questions as to whether grazing regulation had been “captured” by the regulated interests.
The act was named for Edward T. Taylor, a congressman from Colorado.” (Wikipedia article, The Taylor Grazing Act)
THIS is directly from the Wikipedia article on Phillip O. Foss:
(which bears reading – the entire article is interesting)
Phillip Foss is perhaps best known for his early cases studies of the role of local grazing advisory committees established by the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 in regulating the grazing of livestock on federal public lands. Foss found that such committees were often dominated by the same ranchers and cattlemen whose activities were supposed to be regulated. Foss often said it was probably the most frequently checked out–and most rapidly returned–university library book in the 1960s.
Foss was a WWII Army Air Corps flyer in the Pacific Theatre. Here are some of his published studies:
(from Wikipedia article)
The Grazing Fee Dilemma. University, AL: University of Alabama Press, 1960.
Politics and Grass. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1960.
The Battle of Soldier Creek. University, AL: University of Alabama Press, 1961.
Reorganization and Reassignment in the California Highway Patrol. University AL: University of Alabama, Press, 1962.
Federal Agencies and Outdoor Recreation. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1962.
Education and Natural Resources. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1964.
An Exploration of Components Affecting and Limiting Policymaking Options in Local Water Agencies, with Duane W. Hill and Charles L Garrison. Fort Collins: Natural Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1968.
Organizational Adaption to Changes in Public Objectives for Management of Cache La Poudre River System, with Duane Hill and Roy L. Meek. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1969.
Organization of Water Management for Agricultural Production in West Pakistan, with Duane Hill. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1970.
Politics and Policies: The Continuing Issues, with Duane Hill. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1970.
Public Land Policy. Boulder: Colorado Associated University Press, 1970.
Outdoor Recreation. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1971.
Politics and Ecology. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press, 1972.
“Policy Analysis and the Political Science Profession.” Policy Studies Journal, 2(Autumn): 67-71, 1973.
Outdoor Recreation and Environmental Quality. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1973.
Environment and Colorado: A Handbook. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1973.
Institutional Arrangements for Effective Water Management in Colorado. Fort Collins: Environmental Resources Center, Colorado State University, 1978.
Federal Lands Policy. New York: Greenwood Press, 1987.
“dominated by the same ranchers and cattlemen whose activities were supposed to be regulated, raising questions as to whether the grazing regulation had been ‘captured’ by the regulated interests.’ The problem was never solved because BLM was powerful as it stood. It has been a kind of dynasty. mar
If we have but weeks to see the ROAM Bill given a Hearing in the Committee, are we going to see this happen? Is anyone hearing from the Committee or Jeff Bingaman? I know he is a person we must reach in order to have that hearing. I will start calling again this week. Responses have been much the same, but changing what we talk about and asking for information should alter that. Good luck all in another round. mar
Just read the USA today article, the head of the NV cattlemen’s assn needs to get some of his facts in order, they(cattlemen) weren’t there first, that would be Native Americans, most of whom had large horse herds that I don’t think they got from the east, the way facts are manipulated makes me crazy,
Jan, Whoever has responded in a positive way, try to get a commitment from them to Support the 2 bills.
Yes, Now BLM wants to dump horses on the East because they like to think this is all because of Eastern meddling. They have implied this many times, over the decades. Jerks… BLM/Cattlemans assoc. are all the same. This must be stopped. It is absurd. mar
Mar, I will do that tomorrow, Durbin is the 1 w/the BLM line, roland Burris was the more positive responder, and really has no reason to be so good about communicating, as he’s not running for reelection, but always responds to me,
Jan, He has his job to do. If he is reachable then he may be put on the horses side. That is fine. I lost track of things when I left Illinois last march. But he is still there. I never had a problem with him and the dirt was always circumstantial. Of course it wa because Chicago Mayor was dirty. mar
I have found the same to be true. Roland Burris has a compassion index score at AWI of 67% and Durbin is 0%. Although Durbin was up there too in previous years. My husband emailed a good friend of his last night that works in Roland Burris’s downstate office. Maybe we can get him to ask for a hearing on S1579.
Also, ask to speak with the LA (Legislative Assistant) that deals with natural resources. My cousin was a staffer last year for one of the OK senators and this is what she told me to do.
“My rec about the LAs: Call your Senators and Rep and say something along the lines: “I would like to speak with the LA who deals with natural resources, specifically the ROAM Act.” It’s not always posted on their websites who handles what, so your best bet is to call and request. If they say, (s)he is unavilable/may I ask who’s calling/etc. then, in my opinion, you should say you are with a lobbyist firm (pick one from IL that works on animal issues or a national one dealing directly with the ROAM Act). I know it’s a stretch, but they’ll usually accept. Once you get through, tell them you are a constituent and knew that was the only way to get through. They will NOT hang up on a constituent. If you don’t want to do that, haha which is understandable, when they ask who is calling you should say something about how you are a concerned constituent/farmer/etc. and have called several, several times without receiving any satisfactory reply.”
I wish some one in these articles would call out the BLM on the fact that the wild horses that are costing the taxpayers so much money are the ones that they have rounded up NOT the ones that are left alone.
Another thought—the R.O.A.M. Bill when passed by the House had lots of co-sponsers. The Senate Bill is only sponsered by Senator Byrd, a Democrat from West Virginia. Would it be helpful to get other Senators to commit to co-sponser the Bill out of respect for Senator Byrd?
I checked on neighboring state Maryland, both Senators have a good compassion rating on Animal Welfare site. I will ask my PA Senators, Bob Casey and Spector to back Byrd.
I just called Senator Landrieu’s Washington office and spoke to “Eric”, a staffer, and requested he give the message to her requesting that she sponsor the bill S.B. 1579 with Senator Byrd. He said he will walk the message down to her.
Also, I sent her an email worded thusly:
Today the American people are in many ways keying on financial survival. One of the tried and true methods of ensuring financial survival is the trait of “frugality.”
I am writing you today, because now, more than ever, the United States taxpayers need your help in sponsoring, with Senator Byrd, S.B. 1579, “The R.OA.M. Act.”
Senator Byrd has given so much of his life to governing on behalf of this great country, and as such, your support is needed for backing both Senator Byrd and respecting his judgement that S.B. 1579 is a good deal for the American people.
As opposed to Secretary Salazar’s costly suggestion of purchasing even more lands at approximately $96 million dollars to set up preserves for wild horses, this great bill will prove to use assets already paid for and maintained by the American taxpayer’s monies, to repatriate the wild horses onto 19 million acres that have been systematically removed from their use over the years.
I believe there is a strong financial reason to support the bill that would give the horses back their rightful land, among many other fine points in the bill, as introduced. In addition to that, keep in mind that the cost which the BLM says is presently burdening them, is incurred by themselves to care for horses that they themselves have been rounding up endlessly and placing in holding, in a job to balance the lands made impossible by the amended Taylor Grazing Act.
The horses presently in the wild are not the ones costing this kind of money to maintain!
Please support Senator Byrd in sponsoring S.B. 1579, “The R.O.A.M. Act”.
Since found out The Taylor Grazing Act was preempted in 1976 by FLPMA (multiple use principle, bests interests of American public principle — allowing swaps, etc. of land at infinitum and ad nauseum) However, it seems to be more of the same mentality driving all this — the BLM and its very cozy Advisory Board. (Since 1934, really, if you want to look into it)
barb, i have been reading that site for a while….i don’t think that it’s at ALL pro-slaughter or pro-cattle!!! i think that those articles you are reading (the recent one from nm student who says wild horses should be eaten is a prime example) are there for us to know what is going on in the wild horse & burro world…..i think that these entries are some serious digging down into the crap of what is out there & what we are facing. she herself has filed lawsuits against salazar, bob abbey, & members of the blm, one seeking a restraining order against removal of 11 herds in nevada. i think that she is working hard for the wild horses, trying to prevent the roundups, trying to get the horses returned to their lands, & is against horse slaughter on all fronts. i know she’s got some issues with ROAM, but then, so do a lot of us! ROAM needs a LOT of work & doesn’t cover all the bases. she tries to point this out, by stating that we cannot let it pass AS IS. it needs some modifications! we’ve heard several people on this website say the exact same thing! please go back & give it a chance! scroll down! read more! there are a few others on tcf blog & rt’s blog who have even posted links to this site….. i don’t think i’m alone in this…..
No, Jo B. I am not happy with ROAM as is, and I believe that Craig Downer has said it needs work. But will they work on it or wait for it to die? If it dies we start at square one and do something better. This may upset some of us, but we have to realize it could happen. Someone may be stonewalling. Eating up time. Will Mary Landrieu get a hearing going? We have to get through to Jeff Bingaman.
That is why a Moratorium is very important. Please sign all petitions. If TCF has not had good luck with petitions yet it is only because they need a broader base. I worked for 3 years on getting polar bears protection, we got it last week. The wolves still have a chance, too. The moratorium could be for years, too. Some have been very long. The science is needed for determining it. Good things can still happen. mar
Even though ROAM is not perfect and since this is the only tool at this time that will get BLM in line, isn’t it in the best interest of Wild Horse Advocates everywhere to stick together and not provide “fodder” for opposition? I guess everybody is entitled to an opinion but look at it this way. Lots of people belong to the National Beef emens Association that raise beef without access to Public Lands, 97% to be accurate. But when National Beef Cattlemen Association comes out with a blanket statement that “we want the horses off the land” then they speak for all of them. They are a powerful lobby—-
JMHO Now back to letter writing—-
I tried to comment, mainly on the cattlemen’s association president’s comments (obviously he hasn’t heard about the wild horse fossils at the La Brea tar pits near Los Angeles, not to mention the Native Americans and horses before cattle ranches) but kept getting errors. It hit me tonight, horses have been serving us for CENTURIES but because people don’t see any value added in wild horses, they’re quick to say “use them for dog food” and other disgusting things. The point is, where does the $50 million dollar figure the BLM claims come from? It can’t be from managing wild horses on public land. We have to challenge that. It must come from their roundups and feeding penned up (incarcerated) horses!
I CALLED SEN AL FRANKEN’S OFFICE TODAY, BUT I AM NOT A RESIDENT OF MINNESOTA. HIS STAFF WORKER SAID THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE ANY ANIMAL RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS FROM HIS STATE TO CONTACT HIM AND GIVE HIM ANY INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE ROAM ACT AND WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT TO GET IT PASSED. HIS WOULD BE A GOOD, LOUD VOICE TO HELP CALL FOR ACTION–HE DOESN’T SEEM TO BE AFRAID OF A FIGHT.
karen, there’s another post that i made earlier today, up above, that is waiting for moderator’s approval (i have 2 links in it…..it may take some time to get posted).
i write about 2 other things, very closely related, that shelley sawhook & cindy macdonald printed out & took with them to dc last week. i think it was discussed on the radio show alst week. they have it available on their respective websites (save our wild horses & vicki tobin’s voices for our horses under the wild horse category). there are some really great points in these 2 documents for using to write to our congressmen & everyone else. keep an eye out for it….if it doesn’t get posted, i can repost so that you have that for your arsenal as well.
My husband’s niece just “lost” her google blog of 4 years standing. I hope that the wildhorsewarriers and others like it do not get “lost irrevocably” as happened to my husband’s niece. That is a good record over the years of constant grinding abuse of the lands.
Also, if anybody knows how to recover a lost blog, let me know. Thanks!
JF, I hope no one has any virus emails. I have gotten several recently and I guess I should say; Beware of DHL Delivery of packages that you are Not expecting. Do not open the email, Delete immediately. There are also people who will go behind your back and try to slander you at a .org. I had Paul Watson and his girlfriend at Sea Shepherd Society tell me that I had a detractor. Many nasty things may happen. Be careful all…. mar
Here’s a link to the Wikipedia Article on the Taylor Grazing Act. I am just now reading it. . . got to the part that says the original act restricted the acreage — but, “as amended” the acreage is unrestricted!
I shall finish reading right away!
The Taylor Grazing Act was preempted in 1976 as the FLPMA (see links to FLPPMA further up)
Also — Since 2001, a lot of FBI agents were reassigned to the Dept of Homeland Security. Hasn’t a great deal of the heinous devastation of the 1971 legislation been devastated since then, with all the attention on Homeland Security and not on the BLM activities?
Here is the National Beef Cattlemen’s reaction to retiring grazing permits. I don’t know if the “retiring grazing permits” is a government program or a proposed one. Any information on this appreciated.
Barbara, For some reason I can’t open the link you provided—says page not found. Anyway, as I understand it, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act, signed 3/30/09, allowed for the retiring of grazing permits on “select public lands” in Oregon and Idaho. It made it possible for the government and conservation groups to buyout grazing permits from ranchers who wanted to participate. A public poll apparently showed that 50% of the ranchers in Nevada were interested in a program such as this, as well.
Great idea–Facebook Wall–will check it out.
I sent emails to Casey and Spector today, PA Senators asking them to co-sponsor the ROAM Bill 1579.
I also asked them to find if BLM had responded to the GAO 2008 Report concerning the review they were to give GAO in March 2009. BLM was supposed to have a review of the history of how they made the determination to manage wild horses and burros on the current 34.3 million acres compared to the 53.5 million acres where they were originally found in 1971. Trying to introduce facts one point at a time by hopefully getting them to respond to me rather than getting “thank you, we got your email”! Like the idea of getting a legistlative assistant rather than just somebody answering the phone or email. Will phone Senators tomorrow. Thanks for all the great ideas here.
I sent both my Senators from PA a request that they co-sponsor the R.O.A.M bill and a question concerning the 2008 report that says that BLM is to submit the history of how they made the determination to manage wild horses and burros on the current 34.3 million acres compared to the 53.5 million acres where they were originally found in 1971. The review was to be complete in March 2009 so I ask them to find it for me. Trying to make them aware of the issues one step at a time. Will call them tomorrow as a follow up and discuss the financial issues of keeping horses in confinement as opposed to on the range and bring up the Anti-Slaughter Bill . Working on a question, comment a day . Educating Senators, not alienating them. Tomorrow I will ask the Mary Landrieu office the same question and ask her to co-sponsor the bill with Senator Byrd.
Here is my latest email to PA Senators—made it personally relate to taxpayers in PA and asked for a moratorium and Congressional Hearing. Also included a link to the latest wild horse info from Nevada. Used the link from HarnessLink since Standardbreds and Harness horses are big in PA.
Dear Senator Casey? Spector,
As a PA voters we are very concerned as to the actions of the Department of Interior and the BLM concerning the roundups of wild horses from Public Lands.
The BLM consistently has used faulty numbers concerning the horses and are in fact, taking out whole herds and reducing herds of wild horses below viability levels. There is even a proposal from Secy.Salazar to move the wild horses in holding pens (over 30,0000) East so “tourists” could view them. That would be like moving the Assateague beach ponies to Montana making no sense at all. It seems the whole crux of the matter is the large corporate farms that run beef cows on these PUBLIC LANDS for a very small sum of money(1.35-1.41 per month cow/calf.
Our family maintains a small beef cow/calf herd here in Pennsylvania. We pay for our land, participate in Chesapeake Bay programs, are active with the 4-H and pay our taxes, all of which is a lot more than 1.31-146 a month for cow and calf. There are only about 27,000 to 30,000 horses left in the area guaranteed to them by the Wild Horse and Burro Act 1971 and that land has been cut from about 54 million acres to 34 million acres. BLM has yet to show how this has been done and done illegally I might add. Over 3 million Cows now graze on Public Lands, many owned by huge corporations, not family ranchers. The beef raised on Public Lands only accounts for 3% of the total beef raised in this country. Horses being out-numbered on the range are being blamed for the range damage. They only account for 5% of the grazing in the areas that they roam. The Federal Public Lands cattle grazing is estimated to be a $123 million a year net loss and the cost of to environment would make it considerable higher. We would save money and wild horses by simply paying legitimate ranchers not to graze.
The bottom line is the BLM is promoting a program that wastes taxpayer’s money. American is losing millions of taxpayer’s dollars subsidizing certain rancher’s bottom lines by allowing for leasing these land for a pittance while the cost of roundup and holding the mustangs are well over 30 million dollars a year. Purchasing land in the East would be more taxpayer dollars.
In closing, I would ask that you ask for a moratorium on the wild horse roundups and a Congressional investigation of the practices of the BLM before any more damage is done to our wild horses and the Public Lands.
Thank you for taking your time to investigate this matter. I would be glad to talk further with you should you have any questions. Here is a link to the wild horse situation on Public Lands in Nevada that explains much about the situation. http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=76443
Barbara and Roger Steele