Free-roaming horse management in North America

Management of free-roaming feral and semi-feral horses, (colloquially called "wild") on various public or tribal lands in North America is accomplished under the authority of law, either by the government of jurisdiction or efforts of private groups.

The law requires that "appropriate management levels" (AML) be set and maintained on public rangelands and that excess horses be removed and offered for adoption.

[10] Additional European settlers brought a variety of horse types to the Americas, and from all sources, some animals eventually escaped human control and became feral.

Herds are found mainly on the Chilcotin Plateau of British Columbia, the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains in Alberta, and in Saskatchewan's Bronson Forest.

[21] In 1943, an export market developed in Europe and the United States and thousands of free-roaming horses were rounded up in Western Canada and shipped for both food consumption and domestic use.

[26] [27] In Saskatchewan the one remaining free-roaming herd is protected under The Protection of the Wild Ponies of the Bronson Forest Act (Saskatchewan) [28] Free-roaming horses on the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains in Alberta are known locally as the Alberta Mountain Horse or "Wildie" (French: Cheval de Montagne de l'Alberta).

[29] This agreement authorized WHOAS to effectively and humanely manage the feral horse population in a 490-square-kilometre (190 sq mi) portion of the Sundre Equine Zone on the Eastern Slopes.

[33] In early 2018 the Alberta Government agreed to consider proposals from other not-for-profit groups to conduct PZP contraceptive programs in other areas of concern to maintain the population at manageable levels.

[28] The Act makes it an offense to "in any way willfully molest, interfere with, hurt, capture or kill any of the wild horses of the Bronson Forest".

[28] In making the determination to protect and manage free-roaming horses on some western Federal lands in 1971[c] Congress declared them to be "living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West (that) contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation".

[40] However, the National Academy of Science refutes that claim, stating that because of the large changes that have taken place in the North American environment in the past 10,000 years: "It cannot be argued that ecological voids dating back 10 millennia exist and that introduced forms are restoring some kind of earlier integrity.

"[39] Researchers Jay F. Kirkpatrick and Patricia M. Fazio have publicly advanced the argument that free-roaming horses should be legally classified as "wild" rather than "feral" asserting that, due to the presence of Equus ferus on the North American continent until the end of the Pleistocene era, horses were once a native species and that "the two key elements for defining an animal as a native species are where it originated and whether or not it coevolved with its habitat."

"[41] In contrast, Bob Garrot, director of the Fish and Wildlife Ecology and Management Program at Montana State University takes the opposite position, explaining, "(A)re they native?

"[42] According to the National Research Council, most free-roaming horse herds are outside of mountain lion and wolf habitat, the two modern species discussed as predators that could potentially control population growth.

[38] Most were managed as "mavericks" or "unbranded stock" under estray laws of the various states,[54] and efforts to control their population were left to "mustangers" and local ranchers.

[70] The WFRH&BA called for management of free-roaming horses to be "designed to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on the public lands.

[71] In 1972, the BLM approached Jay F. Kirkpatrick and John W. Turner and requested that they find a contraceptive that could be used to check the population growth of the free-roaming horses.

"[78] In 1978, the WFRH&BA was amended in the Public Rangelands Improvement Act requiring the agencies to set "Appropriate Management Levels" (AML) and remove excess wild horses.

BLM terminated the large scale program in 1988 after negative publicity and pressure from the Congress[86] and from 1988 until 2004, Congress prevented the Bureau from destroying excess healthy unadopted animals[79] by stating, in the Department of the Interior's annual appropriations acts, that "appropriations herein shall not be available for the destruction of healthy unadopted wild horses and burros in the care of the Bureau of Land Management or its contractors.

Sanctuaries were meant to "encourage tourism and economic development in the area as well as public understanding of BLM'S wild horse program"[87] but as time went on the concept evolved into "long term holding.

[100] From fiscal year 2006 through 2009—though there was no restriction on selling or euthanizing excess horses—BLM chose not to exercise either option due to "concerns over public and Congressional reaction to the large-scale slaughter of thousands of healthy horses.

"[111] In both the 2015 and 2016 budgets the Rahall language to prevent euthanizing and selling without limitation excess horses and to continue to allow funds to be used for long term holding.

"[114] In response to the RAC recommendation, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) refuted the idea that the BLM should remove horses to achieve AML and instead implement fertility control.

[116] Instead of implementing the RAC recommendation the Rahall language was again included in the budget bill which finally passed on May 5, 2017, to manage spending until the end of the FY2017, but the increased Congressional attention on the costs of the program,[117] The explanatory statement accompanying the budget reflected increased Congressional attention on the costs of the program, and required the BLM to prepare and submit: "a plan to achieve long-term sustainable populations on the range in a humane manner" giving the agency 180 days, until early November, to submit the plan (hereafter referred to as the "report").

The budget proposed to eliminate appropriations language restricting BLM from using all of the management options authorized in the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act.

"[119] Despite Senate prodding on November 20, 2017, stating: "The Committee looks forward to the release of the report...and is hopeful that it will contain a range of humane and politically viable options that can collectively be implemented to drastically reduce on-range populations and a variety of methods to limit unsustainable on-range reproduction",[83] the BLM failed to submit the report, so Congress declined to remove the Rahall language from the 2018 budget, stating: "Until the Department provides a comprehensive plan and any corresponding legislative proposals to the appropriate authorizing committees, the Committees will maintain the existing prohibitions and reduce the resources available for the program" and gave the BLM until April 22, 2018, to submit the report.

[120][o] On April 26, 2017, the BLM submitted the report as required,[121] providing several options for Congress to consider, including fertility control as recommended by the HSUS, mostly consisting of permanent sterilization.

Ruminates such as cattle and sheep, with their multi-chambered stomachs, can extract more energy from their feed, and thus require less, but more high quality forage, such as leaves and forbs.

Allowing livestock, including horses, to graze year-round not only degrades the range, but negatively impacts the wildlife that shares the same area.

[145] Another concern is that Feral horses compete for water with other wildlife species, and often are dominant over some, such as the pronghorn, which in drought conditions causes stress that impacts the survival.