HOUSE CLEARS WILD HORSE BILL

News Date July 21, 2009

The House of Representatives passed legislation on Friday that would modify the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 by expanding the amount of public lands available for wild horse habitat as well as by restricting population controls and disposal methods. 

Because of the risks the legislation poses to the to the health of domestic livestock populations and public lands, as well as the economic viability of rural communities, NASDA opposed the legislation and sent a letter to members of the House prior to last week’s vote. 

The act allows for 19 million additional acres to be opened for wild horses and free-ranging burros, while severely limiting the powers of federal wildlife managers to control and maintain these herds. 

Provisions of the legislation limiting population control tools and animal disposal methods could have serious impacts on the health of wild horse populations. Because wildlife managers would be restricted on the way in which they can control herds of wild horses for diseases, these diseases will be able to travel rapidly through the herds. Also, because the legislation would expand the habitat of these animals, domestic livestock will have increased interactions with these herds and face increased threats of disease. For example, the disease Equine Infectious Anemia (EIA) is an infection that could spread rapidly among a susceptible wild horse population and be easily spread from wild horses to domestic livestock, with devastating consequences. The U.S. horse industry currently spends millions each year to test and control this disease.

NASDA also expressed concerns about the impact the legislation could have on rangeland health and water resources. By expanding the areas in which wild horses and burros are allowed—and by restricting methods by which these populations can be controlled—ecosystems could be subjected to further stress.

The legislation passed the House 239 to 185, with 47 Democrats joining 138 Republicans in opposing the bill. (By: Austin Miles, Policy Contact: Nathan Bowen)