WILD HORSES OF ALTO (W.H.O.A!) disclaimer: this blog is in no way associated with the group WHOA (Wild Horse Observers Association). This blog has actually become like a vertical file in the library where important past documents - like newspaper articles - are filed and kept for research when needed. It has become almost a lesson in librarianship for me.
WILD HORSES OF ALTO The herd of wild horses in Alto, N.M., are the offspring of estray horses that roamed Sierra Blanca on Mescalero and National Forest land. Today the herds roam the same territory as well as dropping in to visit some of the subdivisions, such as Enchanted Forest, Sierra Vista, Sun Valley, LaJunta, Little Creek and occasionally Alto Lakes Golf & Country Club. For the most part, the herds are loved and welcomed. But sometimes not.
At this time, it is being decided in a court of law whether the horses are wild or domesticated (and therefore estray). At present, the horses fall under the auspices of the N.M. Livestock Board. We are trying to save all members the herd and other herds that exist in the area. We do NOT want to deny the horses the freedom they have known in the past and the comradeship the herd provides them.
To institute change in the policy and protect the future of our magnificent Wild Horses of Alto herd, we have a petition at https://www.change.org/p/new-mexico-governor-save-alto-wild-horses, a fundraising site for lawyers and feed/care at https://www.gofundme.com/altohorses, an account set up at City Bank-Ruidoso for donations to the "Wild Horses of Lincoln County Trust Fund" and an ongoing facebook group "Bring Ruidoso Horse's Back". Click on the Stallion's photo to go directly there.
PLEASE SPEAK UP, sign petitions, give to the trust fund for the horses. Sign up to this blog to get continual updates and to also post your own comments.
Members of the wild horse herd of Alto rounded up in 2016 were released Saturday back to the area they previously freely roamed.
Patience O'Dowd, president of the Wild Horse Observers Association that filed the legal action resulting in the return of the horses, said Monday she urged all concerned residents to call the District 2 office of the New Mexico Department of Transportation asking for digital speed signs to be positioned for the safety of the horses, cyclists, dogs, elk, deer and others endangered by speeders on NM 48 through the Alto area.
Local residents monitored the horses the first night and O'Dowd and others were out the second night.
Two horses were hit, but they were not members of the newly release herd, she confirmed. Both walked away and she has seen one of them running and not seemingly bothered by scratches on its shoulder and leg. The hits also were not connected to being blinded by car lights of advocates, she said. A police report on the incident was filed.
O'Dowd said loading the horses who had been free roaming on a ranch near Carrizozo wasn't a problem. By the third load, she's convinced the remaining members of the herd knew where they were headed and wanted to go home. They nearly jumped into the trailer, she said.
Monday morning she saw a stallion and five mares browsing in a yard that had been one of their favorites, O'Dowd said.
The decision of a district court judge mandated the return of the horses and redefined the jurisdiction of the New Mexico Livestock Board.
O'Dowd said her biggest concern now are trucks and larger vehicles that seem to want to endanger the horses and that she was told have been clocked at 102 mph. Advocates are convinced the digital speed signs would alert drivers and cause them to slow their speed.
"This is a safety corridor and fines for speeding are double," she said. "We are asking that police monitor speed on NM48 in Alto this week at dusk and during the night. So watch your speed guys.. Its'- always law-breakers who have hurt these wild horses.
Horses moved yesterday, March 20 - first day of Spring. All that is know by blogger is that the herd is on a ranch near Carrizozo waiting for the May court date. Whew. Way hotter there than their homeland mountains.
May 21 post see a video of the herd's move at the above link
"BREAKING NEWS" Alto Wild Horses Released
at a Scholarly Gentleman's Lincoln County Ranch!!
=======================================
*After being corralled for 1.5 yrs, the Alto Wild Horses were released onto over 2000 acres while they wait for their final day of FREEDOM, after which these horses plan to work for Alto/Ruidoso Tourism as they always have!
*Community Members came together to make this happen!!
*A Kind Gentleman Rancher and an Oilman worked together with WHOA and local WHOA members to make this happen. Natural foot wear is critical for wild horses.
*The horses milled around the round bales provided for a short time and then literally ran off into the wide expanse becoming dots in the horizon.
*Two of the 15 Alto Wild horses (Mare and foal) were moved back to the Enchanted Forest (Their home territory with Blaze) and are having the filly's feet trimmed and the mare's wound addressed. (Seperate post for these two later today.) We are looking forward to a BLAZE & HIS long time MARE REUNION.
+++> BREAKING NEWS - RANCH CONTRACT SIGNED <+++++++
WHOA is pleased to announce that a very kind and community minded Ranch owner has stepped up provide a contract for the horses. WHOA is also pleased to announce that there has been a phone conference between WHOA and the NMLB discussing details:
1. The ranch is in Lincoln County. 2. The ranch will provide 100 acres minimum per horse. 3. Until court it will be 133 acres/horse all together at 2000 acres. 4. There are wranglers there to supplemental feed and watch them. 5. The move from the current property (Who, when) 6. Potential need for a fosters location for the potential 2 that may need this. 7. PZP was discussed and requested. 8. Working toward the NMLB's vet, The Signers Vet, and WHOA's Vet meeting and viewing the horses this wk-end prior to this move.
We will continue and finalize negotiations via email.
Hooves ======= The free roaming ability provided here will very likely resolve/prevent all over grown foot issues naturally.
Costs Avoided if NMLB approves ========================== The charge that the NMLB was considering at Santa Fe was $15/DAY/horse which is $5 more than the usual. That would have been $6,750/month to be split by WHOA and the NMLB.
Costs if NMLB approves the ranch =========================== The charge by kind owner of the beautiful ranch is $15/MONTH/horse plus supplemental feed as needed. WHOA is expecting that our share each month will be $112 to $863 depending on forage/rain. The same as that for the NMLB. This does not include the feed for the two horses likely in temporary foster care.
THANK YOU to ALL involved in any way so far!!!
* PREVIOUS POST BELOW* =================================================== =================================================== WHOA UPDATE: SEARCH FOR A RANCH BACK ON
WHOA is looking for a Ranch where the penned Alto Wild Horses can roam on 3 sections for 2 to 12 months.
While the penned horses have been cared for by volunteers under contract to the court for the last yr and a half, we want to acknowledge that this is not logically a sustainable situation and this has been 3 times as long as originally thought.
WHOA's first preference is to have the horses on a ranch, free roaming, feeding and watering themselves, wearing down their own hooves, eating a variety of natural grasses, OR, second preference is to have them in the care of people whose actual job it is, to care for them professionally at the horse facilities in Santa Fe. (Remember folks, this is also where movie producers keep their horses.)
WHOA understands that this case make go longer than May 18th due to the fact that the outcome of court May 14th to 18th may end up appealed to the NM Appellate Court, and again to the NM Supreme Court. In either case, these courts can decide NOT to hear the case and thereby uphold the lower courts decision.
In any case, WHOA is holding strong as always for FREEDOM.
WHOA will not entertain a private owner corral situation with volunteers for the Alto Wild Horses for the following reasons.
1. Volunteers have other jobs and responsibilities and cannot be expected to keep up such a a commitment for these time periods without undue stress and complications.
2. Caring for 16 horses is a tremendous task over time and cannot be taken lightly or ignored on even one day no matter what.
3. A corral situation without the proper footing for the wearing down of hooves naturally is a huge liability for the health of the horses in a non-professional situation.
4. Wild horses can roam, exercise, maintain their hooves, forage for food, smell water, in a ranch situation without relying on people day to day, hauling feed, hauling water, hauling excrement, or putting them at risk by tranquilizing them, in order to trim their feet. The latter is also a huge risk for the humans involved especially without the proper expensive equipment.
5. A ranch situation is a Win Win Win we believe for all involved. The Horses, WHOA, and the NMLB. The horses were healthy when free roaming as admitted by the NMLB and seen by all. The NMAG objected to having responsibility to the horses in court.
A ranch situation (Like WHOA had acquired but lost) would minimize the work and risk by all, while providing the most natural and healthy situation for these deserving large mammals.
6. Wild horses are not pets and are best dealt with by paid professionals.
7. With the state and our veterinarian, there will transparency as required by law.
in summary WHOA now being given equal shared responsibility and authority of the wild horses with the NMLB by the court, takes sustainability into account and is acting accordingly.
WHOA WON!!
ANOTHER STEP TOWARD FREEDOM
Major Results Today AND a BLAZE Sighting
1. The WILD horses made it through another unforeseen attempt at adoption today, and are still on track for Freedom!
2. The May 14-18 Court Date for this case will not be pushed out any further, no matter what, by either side!
3 The WILD horses will be in the custody of WHOA and the NMLB with 50/50 responsibility in 10 days.
We will keep you updated. We are working to keep them in Lincoln County as well as other considerations like their feet/hooves.
(A complicated day and those are the results - Further Motions were filed today by the Defendants before court. Motions we thought would be heard today mostly were not.)
A Total (19) Motions have now been filed, and still the Plaintiff has filed only (3) of these.
March 7 posting on Facebook group: Bring Ruidoso's Horses Back
The ORDER has been signed and ENTERED. A property HAS been located. When all i's are dotted and t's crossed, more shall be revealed.
Thank you ALL for your support. We can't do this without YOU!
A Total (16) Motions have been filed, the Plaintiff has filed only (3) of these. Plaintiff's Motions were filed timely as per the Court's Scheduling Order.
FIVE (5) Outstanding Motions to be heard on Monday Feb 26th!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) NMLB's Motion in Limine to Exclude Plaintiff's Witnesses Bonnie McGahee and Lorri Burnett
2) NMLB's First Motion to Compel Plaintiff's deposition.
(Plaintiff has been deposed for 7 hrs.)
3) Board's Motion to Compel Deposition and for Attorney Fees and Costs - (Plaintiff has been deposed for 7 hrs.)
4) Intervenor Motion to Move the Alto Penned Wild Horses Back to Santa Fe during remainder of trial.
5) Intervenor Motion to remove 2 Signers from the Signer's list (at their request).
==> Let us know if you have any questions!
==> Hope to see you there!
The TRIAL itself, has been rescheduled to May 14th thru 18th
also from facebook: We received the following notices from the Court. Dates for upcoming hearings are listed. The next date is Monday, February 26, 2018 at 1:15pm. This hearing will determine the Intervenors request to amend the TRO and move the captive Wild herd off their property and sent back to Santa Fe.
Wild Horses of Lincoln County/WHOA vs NMLB COURT DATE: November 16th 2017 1:00PM at Carrizozo 12th District Court
Spent some time today with our captured herd. They are so undeserving of what is being done to them by the TRO & the court case. Hopefully there will be a decision on the 16th & this nightmare will end for them. We are in need of donations to continue caring for them. There have been so many caring people in the community, around NM & out of state that have dug deep in there pockets to make sure these horses are given the best care possible & it has been GREATLY appreciated. Hopefully we just have to get them through the 16th & this nightmare will be over for them. So please if you can donate please do so. Call Peggy Annen-Schoemann @ Little Bear Feed @ 973-2388. We now are starting them on alfalfa so the bales are a little cheaper.
While a dozen or more members of a horse herd that roamed the Alto area are confined to fenced pens awaiting their fate, individuals who voiced support for the horses in the past seemed to have split into different sides with different goals.
Saturday, several of the original supporters who sounded the alarm after the horses were rounded up by a homeowner and later hauled to Santa Fe by the New Mexico Livestock Board, and five who signed on as official caretakers of the horses when they were returned, called a meeting to discuss the equines’ future.
But when members of the Wild Horse Observers Association arrived, the story gets hazy with both sides contending the other was disruptive and intimidating. WHOA is a nonprofit Placitas-based organization that filed for a temporary restraining order to prevent the state from selling the herd at auction.
Ruidoso Police Chief Darren Hooker said his officers were on stand-by to ensure no major problems developed at Wingfield Park in Ruidoso. Although a permit for use of the park pavilion had been obtained by Barbara Yates, one of the meeting organizers, the individuals decided to regroup at a local real estate office.
“I told the officer that our message is not about fighting, our message is about truth and facts,” Yates said Monday. “So we decided to leave to help the officers keep the peace.”
She emphasized that most of the local people at the meeting were not members of any organization, but individuals who still are committed to the welfare of the horses.
One of the major criticisms by those at the relocated meeting was their contention that WHOA is not contributing financially toward the physical care of the horses despite collection jars in the county stating that purpose. They urged that donations for the horses be paid directly to Little Bear Feed in Capitan, where an account is established. They said if anyone is concerned about past donations, they can request the charities investigation arm of the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office to look into the finances.
Another criticism is their contention that a resolution is needed to ensure the future care of the horses, who now are in limbo awaiting a judge’s ruling on a motion for summary judgment in favor of WHOA and a motion by the state attorney general’s office on behalf of the livestock board that when WHOA filed the suit, it had no standing on the issue, because it did not have a county resident on its board.
Yates, Melissa Babcock and Robbi Davis among others point to an agreement by the Livestock Board that depending on the judge’s ruling, caretaker signers for the horses would have first option to adopt and that any other applicants would be screened. If any horses from a roaming herd are penned in the future, the board would consult the community before taking action, an element missing in the original situation.
Yates noted that while an informal similar agreement was struck before, the new agreement would have force of law with court action.
Ari Biernoff, the lawyer who represents the livestock board from the attorney general’s office and was at the meeting, said that the agreement was worked out when he met earlier in the year with the nine signers who are responsible for the horses while they are confined.
The individuals at the meeting seemed convinced the horse herd could not be released to roam the Alto area again. Yates explained that “public land” where the horses could be “allowed” is practically nonexistent and does not include the national forest. Defining the term “public land” was one of the issues Bryant wanted to research before ruling on the two motions, she pointed out.
“We all love these horses and want them to stay on our mountain and be under the local care and control of the community, because that’s who been watching out for them all along,” Yates said. “The livestock board has said they are not interested in rounding up wild horses. That’s not their job. But if (WHOA) keeps us in court as (WHOA president) Patience O’Dowd has done in Placitas, these horses are in legal limbo and it’s not fair to them. They are living breathing creatures and to me that is cruel. I’m not saying they are not getting proper care, but they can’t halter break them, they can’t even do simple things like farrier care without all this drama and stress on the horses. It’s not right.
“We all were told 120 days (and the horses’ fate would be settled) and it is way past that.”
O’Dowd stated her position in a prepared statement submitted to the Ruidoso News:
“The community of Ruidoso and Alto are overwhelmingly united for the freedom of these majestic wild horses. This is clear from the over 94,000 signatures for freedom, and wild horse tourism, also from the 95 (percent) of the Enchanted Forest community in a door to door petition filed with the court. This support for freedom also includes three of (the) signers, one being a life-long horse professional as well as WHOA/Wild Horses of Lincoln County experts.
“All money raised for the Alto horses from within the community and from outside the community has been spent, and will be spent, on these horses for their care and their freedom. There are no salaried WHOA board members. WHOA has spent over $15,000 for feed and care of the horses and continues as able while the opposition increases costs by delay. This documentation (is) available.
“WHOA has not delayed the courts. The courts scheduling order stated that motions should be filed by April 10, 2017, and WHOA respectfully filed its last motion for Summary Judgement on that date. However, since that date, the NMLB has filed four motions, all long after the requested end date for motions. Each motion requires a minimum of six weeks to allow both sides to respond, and allows for three extensions for each side. Hence, each motion can delay court resolution for two months or even more. Each motion also increases costs for attorney's fees for freedom and hay costs for internment. WHOA has respected the courts scheduling order.
“WHOA has not changed sides and has stayed true to the Mission Statement, which is freedom. WHOA has replied to the motion to dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order and adopt out all the horses. This is a question for the courts and the experts. WHOA opposes this motion.”
Although one herd's ultimate disposition is unresolved, at least two other horse herds still roam the Alto and Ski Run Road area.
Using an old photo, but The Stallion can be seen just wandering around neighborhoods all by himself. It is as if he is going by checking all their stomping grounds. Are they here? Photo by Shannan Dobbs-Gabaldon
Dianne L Stallings , Ruidoso News
Published 11:45 a.m. MT March 28, 2017 | Updated 11:50 a.m. MT March 28, 2017
Head of the Wild Horse Observers Association offers some comments about bills
With
the dust finally settling on the New Mexico Legislature’s 2017 session,
most of the bills and memorials dealing with wild horses died in
committee.
The dead include House Bill 446 called Wild Horse in
Statute and the accompanying House Memorial 102, Protection of Wild
Horses. Also among the dead were House Joint Memorial 17, Protection of
Wild Horses, and Senate Bill 126 introduced by Republican Pat Woods from
Broadview, that would have changed livestock and wild horse
definitions. That last bill was opposed by many local wild horse
advocates as an attempt to eliminate the existence of wild horses in the
state by classifying horses as livestock, but supported by some who
contended the bill’s provisions protected property owners as well as
horses. A second bill introduced by Woods, Senate Bill 184, Disposition
of Trespassing Wild Horses, also died in committee.
The only
survivor among the passel of proposed legislation was House Bill 390,
Equine Rescue and Shelter Right of Refusal. The bill gives registered
equine rescue or retirement facilities the first right of refusal to
purchase an unclaimed horse classified as estray, or those that have
been cruelty treated or caught while trespassing. If an owner doesn’t
claim an estray equine within the allotted few days after the last
publication of notice, a rescue or retirement facility will be given the
chance to purchase the horse. If neither action occurs, the state
livestock board has the right to sell the horse, which would include
buyers with the intent to slaughter. If no bids are received, the board
can order the horse to be humanely euthanized.
Patience O’Dowd,
who heads the Wild Horse Observers Association, the group that
interceded after the roundup of a dozen members of a wild horse herd in
Alto, offered some observations about the bills considered in the state
legislative session that ended earlier this month.
She said the
insertion of exemptions for horses of Spanish colonial origin in Wood’s
SB126 was not pushed by her organization, it was another group that
works with the livestock board.
“It was a shill,” she said. “All it did was make a bad bill look good. It did not improve things at all.”
Thankfully
some legislators were educated enough on the issue not to be fooled,
she said. They correctly understood the rule of law.
“WHOA had two
very successful years in the legislature in 2006 and 2007,” O’Dowd
said. “In those two years we passed SB655 and three memorials.”
The
senate bill was the basis for the successful court cases and was
codified in state statute, defining Spanish colonial horses, requiring
them to be relocated to horse preserves, allowing for adoption and
providing for the control of wild horse population by means of birth
control.
During the 2017 legislative session, three lobbyist
organizations attended every committee meeting speaking for SB126,
O’Dowd said.
“They all were ganging up to support 126, which is a
bad bill for wild horses and would remove their protection as wild
horses,” O’Dowd said. “So we had a stream roller coming down on these
wild horses while we’re in the middle of (the) district court (case) and
they were attempting to basically play legislative favoritism and roll
over our judicial branch of government.”
WHOA previously received a
temporary injunction against the sale of the Alto herd after it was
rounded up, and is challenging in district court, the jurisdiction of
the New Mexico Livestock Board insistence that wild horses are estray
livestock.
People just didn’t bother reading the bill when they saw that an animal protection voters group backed it, O'Dowd said.
“Luckily
there are people in roundhouse who know how to read for themselves,”
she said. “Luckily, a new fiscal analysis was written at end that
admitted to legilslative favortism and a clear attempt to overturn all
financial investment and time of the people and the court and the
previous legislature."
Under SB126, few if any horses would have
been considered wild and pass the test for protection. The bill also
contained nothing to stop the livestock board from declaring a wild
horse an estray livestock. The board previously has never declared any
horse “wild,” not even the Spanish colonials, despite the board’s own
genetic testing showing the Placitas horses at 91 percent to 96 percent
Spanish markers, significantly more than the 80 percent probability
required, according to WHOA’s web presentation on the bill. The other
problems with the amended bill were that wild horses would have to
originate on public land, they could be classified as livestock and
would have preempted federal law by removing the requirement that
livestock be domestic or owned. The bill would have placed the wild
horses under a board that never has recognized their existence as wild,
the website stated.
Senate Bill 126 wasn’t taken down for lack of
time, O'Dowd said. “It was taken down because of those issues. We did
everything every step of the way we could under the law."
“Because
of that, the wild horses prevailed and they are still protected and we
still have a viable court case and we will still be there in court for
those horses," she said. "We would have anyway, because we would have
taken further action. The horses have nothing to hide from. The truth
and law are on their side. Since 126 didn’t pass, the horses remain
under the same protection that they had from existing laws 10 years
ago.”
While HB390 was “a decent bill” in its original form, amendments changed that, O’Dowd said.
“For
the horse rescuers, HB390 gives them first right of refusal, so they
don’t have to compete with kill buyers or the public,” she said. “They
have to pay $100 or $200, which is what they usually pay now, sometimes
less. It just gives them first opportunity, so it will protect a few
estray livestock equine from kill buyers. But those not bid on in the
first round and that the rescue groups don’t take, the kill buyers will
take them in the second round. That second option wasn’t there in the
(original bill).” According to testimony, the livestock board and
industry requested the amendments and the sponsor allowed them, she
said.
Dianne L Stallings , Ruidoso News
12:03 p.m. MT March 14, 2017
As
the New Mexico Legislature prepares to close its session, debate still
boils over how to protect wild horses and private property
With
the 2017 session of the New Mexico Legislature drawing to a close
Saturday, people on different sides of the “wild horse” debate in
Lincoln County and elsewhere in the state are pushing for passage of
bills or memorials they hope will clarify the status of the herds that
roam the Alto and Ski Run Road area.
One side is focusing more on protection of private property rights and the other on protection of the horses and their freedom.
The
latest proposed legislation is House Memorial 102 introduced by State
Rep. Joanne J. Ferrary, a Democrat from District 37, with input from
Patience O’Dowd, head of Wild Horse Observers Association. Her
organization won a temporary injunction against the sale of a dozen
members of a “wild” herd hauled away and then returned to Lincoln County
by New Mexico Livestock Board. The case is pending in district court.
The memorial acknowledges the role of the conservation division of the
state Department of Game and Fish in “protecting, maintaining and
enhancing wildlife habitat,” and requests the division conduct an
interim study and to provide recommendation for the protection,
maintenance an enhancement of wild horse herds and habitat in the state.
The
memorial notes that the state has not managed the population of wild
horses by immunocontraception in the last 10 years despite public
policy, and contends management more likely would occur if a specific
state agency had jurisdiction. Several tribes and pueblos already are
managing wild horse population by immunocontraception and officials with
two nongovernmental organizations as well are trained to administer the
drug by darting, the memorial states. Fewer than 300 wild horses are on
federal and state grazing lands in New Mexico compared to half a
million cattle, it contends.
A long list of stakeholders in the
well-being of wild horses included artists, outfitters, horse rescue
groups, rural economic development organizations and the state tourism,
the memorial states.
The New Mexico Livestock Board has exercised
control over the wild horses of the state, considering them to be estray
livestock subject to capture and disposal by the board, but the
conservation services division is better suited to determine the status,
needs, habitat requirements and issues of human interaction with wild
horses than the board, according to the memorial. After tangling with
the livestock board over horses in Alto and Placitas, wild herd
advocates also seem to lack trust in the livestock board's intentions, a
significant impediment.
The legislature’s website listed the
memorial Tuesday as referred to the House State Government, Indian and
Veterans Affairs Committee.
O’Dowd insists that advocates for the
well-being of the wild horse herds can no longer support Senate Bill
126, introduced by State Sen. Pet Woods, a Republican from District 7,
if they claim they are against the slaughter of horses. The amended bill
passed the Senate 32-2 and was sent to the House State Government,
Indian and Veterans Affairs Committee.
The bill classifies horses
as livestock, but defines a wild horse as unclaimed without obvious
brands or other evidence of private ownership determined by the board to
originate from public land or federal land or to be part of, or
descended from a herd that lives on or originated from public land.
Excepted are horses that are subject to the jurisdiction of the federal
government pursuant to the federal Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros
Act and those determined to a Spanish Colonial horse.
Captured
horses could be relocated to a preserve, adopted or humanely euthanized.
A herd could be removed from a range, if the range improvement task
force of New Mexico State University makes that recommendation after
evaluating the condition of the rangeland in response to a request from
the livestock board.
One of the key players in the situation with
the Alto herd contends whether the horses there came from the
reservation or from the wilderness area of the national forest is
irrelevant, because both are federal land.
“So that gives the
so-called wild horses special dispensation,” she said. “It does not mean
that if they are found wandering on private property, stallions
threatening mares or the well-being of private land or person that the
private landowner doesn’t have the right to call the NMLB. This bill
gives that protection to private land owners.”
She contended it is
“highly unlikely” anyone is going to complain about horses on public
land unless someone is injured on the highway.
She also noted that
the state fence-out law does not mean that a person must have a fence,
but if an owner does not put up a fence, and cattle or other livestock
enter the property and cause damage, the owner then cannot register a
legal claim for damage reimbursement.
Genetically verified Spanish
Colonial horses are considered valuable by breeders, she said. Few have
been verified in New Mexico. Senate Bill 126 also addresses testing to
determine if a captured horse is of Spanish colonial heritage and if it
is, to relocate it to a state or private wild horse preserve created and
maintained to protect Spanish colonial horses.
“If not, (the bill
reads that) it shall be returned to the state public land, relocated to
a public or private preserve or put up for adoption by the agency on
whose land the wild horse was captured,” she said. The livestock board
is the proper agency to manage wild horses and livestock, she contended.
Other
pending legislation includes House Bill 390, introduced by State Rep.
Nathan Small, a Democrat from District 36, which would allow an equine
rescue group first chance to purchase an unclaimed estray horse or it
will be euthanized, later amended to allow public bid. Advocates contend
that bidding would include buyers headed to a slaughter house. The
amended bill was passed by the House 50-17 and referred to the Senate
Conservation Committee. The initial aim of the bill was to prevent
cruelty to livestock, advocates say.
House Bill 284, also
introduced by Woods, hasn’t moved from the Senate Conservation and
Senate Judiciary Committee referral. That bill deals with trespass on
private land by horses, giving the Livestock Board jurisdiction and
clarifying procedures to be followed when wild horses come into the
custody of the board, including adoption, relocation to a preserve or
euthanasia.
Dianne L Stallings , Ruidoso News
Published 3:33 p.m. MT March 16, 2017 | Updated 3:36 p.m. MT March 16, 2017
Game
and Fish officials contend they lack expertise to manage wild horses
and the effort would divert resources from indigenous wildlife
The
task of conducting a habitat study and then managing wild horse herds
in New Mexico would be costly and time-consuming, and would divert
resources of the conservation arm of the New Mexico Game and Fish
Department from indigenous wildlife management, according to a Fiscal
Analysis of House Bill 446 and its accompanying House Memorial 102.
Both
the bill and the memorial were introduced by State Rep. Joanne Ferrary,
a Democrat from District 37, and both were tabled in committee this
week, according to a legislative spokesman. As the legislature prepares
to shut down at noon Saturday, the bill sits in the House Energy and
Natural Resources/House Judiciary Committee and the memorial, proposed
by Patience O'Dowd of the Wild Horse Observers Association,
languishes in the House State Government, Indian and Veterans Affairs
Committee.
The bill would have expand the jurisdiction of Game and
Fish under the Wildlife Conservation Act to include wild horses without
defining the term, writers for the Legislative Finance Committee noted
in their analysis. The bill provides another definition of “wild horse,”
as simply a horse “showing no indicia of ownership.” That differs from
the definition in existing law governing the disposition of wild horses
captured on public land, including descendants of Spanish colonial
horses, the analysts stated.
The bill would transfer jurisdiction
over those horses from the state livestock board to game and fish and
would task the latter agency with determining when preservation of the
genetic stock and range conditions require the use of birth control to
limit a wild horse herd population. The bill also would extend the duty
of private landowners to fence their properties from trespassing horses
to include wild horses.
The report states that game and fish
officials estimate $340,000 for start-up costs in Fiscal 2017, that
would include hiring a wild horse biologist, conducting a survey of the
state to determine the locations of wild horse herds, and building or
leasing facilities to temporarily house horses while DNA testing is
conducted. Another $100,000 would be needed each year to continue the
work, plus a $50,000 annual estimated cost per horse to house and
maintain any captured Spanish colonial horses in perpetuity, if no one
adopts them and there is no public land or wild horse preserve
available.
Listed as significant issues in the report were that
adding wild horses to the definition of wildlife under the WCA is
contrary to procedures laid out in state statute under the act. A
species first must be listed, a process that could take nine months to
one year and is only applicable to species of wildlife indigenous to the
state, which does not include wild horses.
A second issue is that
the livestock board has jurisdiction for managing wild horse, because
their employees work with the animals and have expertise and access to
facilities. Assigning the task to game and fish would take away
resources from managing native wildlife species, they stated.
Other
issues include that the bill provided no chance for an owner to claim a
horse that may not be branded, tattooed, microchipped or showing other
indicia of ownership. And the release provision conflicts with language
that horses be adopted or relocated to other public land or to public or
private preserves.
The analysts noted that the wildlife
definition would “open the door for (game and fish) to create a
permitting system for horse hunting as wildlife.” They argued that no
long-term effective contraception methods exist and that fertility
control would have to be administered annually.
The analysis
contends the deadline to finish the survey of December 2017 is
unrealistic, because the agency has no expertise to manage wild horses,
new staff would have to be hired and existing staff would require
significant training. The agency also has no authority to implement any
recommendations derived from a study. The transfer of jurisdiction would
divert financial resources and could cost an initial $400,000 plus
$800,000 in additional personnel for habitat analysis, plus the expense
of helicopter surveys.
The analysts also had problems with some of
the wild horse population figures in the memorial, but acknowledged
that by not passing the bill, confusion over the capture and disposition
of wild horses may continue.
