Wild Horse Sanctuary……Wild Horse Breeder….. Research Facility…….Tourist Trap…….I Am Confused…..

Mustang preserves, horse sanctuaries, rescues, or anti-slaughter figure heads who own stallions rub my fur wrong. Humanitarians with hands out and pockets open all the while condemning those who try to produce the next generation of good horses at a profit for creating the problem. Those who reserve the right to panhandle for donations should not be allowed to reproduce your problems/horses. If the horses have nowhere else to go and you depend on the taxpayers/philanthropists to support them, for love of all that’s holy, don’t make more of them. Not even in the name of research or love.
Personally, I love geldings. As a matter of fact I am looking into a grant to research the cultural herd dynamic of the altered male domestic horse as we speak. To truly understand these unique special horses and educate people in their care we need to study their habitat and culture. Of course, I will need to lease more pasture and obtain more altered male domestic horses. I have transportation equipment and an operational head quarter, but would accept donations to offset the cost of maintenance and day to day operation. Anyone wishing to sponsor the training of or adopt one of these altered male domestic horses please refer to the Anything For a Buck Rescue blog written some time ago, while the horse described there has been sold (err….adopted) I have others. I know…. it just doesn’t work for me…….go figure……..anyway back to the article in question and my backward rubbed fur.
The following is taken from an article in South Dakota magazine, the May/June issue to be exact. The article is available in its entirety if you wish to purchase the magazine back issue you can do so at http://www.southdakotamagazine.com/ . If not then you’re going to have to make do with what I comment on. You will have to take my word many of the pictures accompanying this article contain 2009 foals. One foal is saved from frostbite in the house after being born in the late spring blizzard this part of the country had the pleasure of enjoying. No, I don’t think the foal should have been left out in the blizzard. I think his mother should never have been allowed to become pregnant in a “sanctuary” in the first place. Hopefully, this winter will be kinder to the northern plains than last.
Karen Sussman has been active with International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros, since 1983 and six years later became the group’s third president. She moved to South Dakota ten years ago, hoping to find a home for the wild horses being removed from the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. She kept the horses in the badlands of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation for two years before buying a patch of grass on the Cheyenne Indian Reservation northwest of Pierre.
Not entirely sure how that works. I was not aware it was possible to “buy” reservation land but that’s what it says so that’s how I will tell it.
She now has 350 horses on 680 acres.
We have to hope she is practicing good horse management or keeping her horses in the same manner as any breeding, training, or boarding establishment which must maintain a large population of horses on a small amount of land. If not she is heading down the Three Strikes path to decimate more than a section of range land grasses. It is the opinion of a local couple, good friends of mine who do know horses, this sanctuary may be sliding down the slippery slope of “hoarder” with a cause.
One of my main pet peeves in the mustang/anti-slaughter debate is the almost total misunderstanding, underestimating, or just don’t give a damn about how much land, funding, and logistics will be needed to work this horse thing out.
Ms. Sussman’s stocking rate on her 680 is 1.95 acres per horse. That’s way over grazing even the best pasture I’ve been lucky enough to rent. The land needed to carry a horse in the Lantry, South Dakota area is closer to five times that I would guess. The stocking rate at Three Strikes which starved 300 head of horses last winter at Alliance, Nebraska was 6.33 acres per horse. Is anyone doing the math here???
There are many areas of public land where the number of acres needed to support a horse is over 100. I am referring to the free roaming horses who are supposed to be self supporting in their natural habitat. I fail to see the difference between 350 horses on 680 acres at a “sanctuary” and any other form of captive confinement by the BLM. The website I visited while researching the numbers for the 41 Mustangs commentary was adamantly against capturing BLM horses to keep them confined.
She hopes to add more land and she wants to find homes for some horses. Last year she placed 200 horses, including 30 to tribal schools.
Just reroute your donations (Journal staff Sunday, October 14, 2007)
there was a hay drive in place to feed some of the horses she adopted out. I have nothing against the Tribal School or natural horsemanship but it would streamline the donation process if the BLM had given the horses directly to the school without Ms. Sussman having to raise them first.
Her main goal is to preserve the bloodlines and culture, and to research behaviors. “A horse population has an education system comparable to Harvard”, “Every herd has its own culture, developed from living together over eons of time if they haven’t been gathered, removed, and disrupted”, Sussman is quoted as saying.
These horses have been disrupted and gathered. These horses have been removed and confined. They are in a “sanctuary”. Their sheer numbers on the land where they reside ensures they will need to be maintained as any other horse population. Something tells me that the culture she is studying/preserving in these mustangs will be strikingly similar to the “culture of an AQHA ranch stallion with his band of mares running on the same 680 acres.
The ISPMB believes the BLM doesn’t understand horses from a behavioral standpoint. I’ll let Ms. Sussman take it from here for now.
“They (the BL M) often destroy the band structure by separating the stallions. Then the younger studs take over and all of a sudden chaos can take over. The bachelor stallions will chase the mares, attack them and rape them.
I don’t know much about mustangs, but any young stallion who tries to “rape” any “domestic” range mare I ever met will be one sorry little teenager.
It’s the harem stallions who create order and respect among a band of horses, and no on challenges him until he is too old or too sick to perform his role.
When a harem stallion is in control fillies are not bred until they are four years old. The mares are respected and the bachelor stallions are well behaved. When a younger and younger community of stallions are allowed to take over who don’t have the education taught to them over a period of years by the harem stallions it’s like having a school run not by professors but by seventh graders. Fertility rates could jump from 10 to 12 percent to over 30 percent.”
“The other day I watched a filly from one band in the herd” she continues, “she was in heat and the bachelors were all around her but she was just a year old so the harem stallion should have protected her, but he wasn’t paying any attention so another stallion chased her down the hill to the water where, a second harem stallion chased her right back over to her own harem. I was amazed to see two harem stallions tell her to go back to her own harem.”
Anyone keeping a tally on how many studs she has residing in the same pasture with this yearling filly? Catch colt anyone? And please refer back to the previous comment about gathering, disrupting, and so on. I would like to see the captive fertility rate on relocated BLM horses at 0 but that’s just me.
She and a National Geographic photographer watched as a young bachelor stallion teased his harem stallion. She says in the article “We saw him sneak in behind the harem with his head down. You could tell he was sneaking. Then he went after the harem stallion from the rear, bit him and raced off. It was interesting to see how well they can plot their actions.”
Again, I am not a mustang expert by any means but we have all heard of herd dynamics in training the domestic horse. I believe this game playing has made Parelli and many other “natural” horsemen very wealthy. I don’t think this behavior is entirely unique to mustangs or bachelor stallions. I have seen one of my two year old altered male domestic horses do it from time to time with the boss altered male domestic horse in charge in the pen. Its common horse knowledge, the higher you are in the pecking order, the better life is so many young horses will test the water on occasion. I was not accompanied by a National Geographic photographer so it all went undocumented. See what I mean about needing that grant????
She keeps track of all the genetic records of every horse that arrives on the ranch with the assistance of Dr. Gus Cothran, a Texas A & M equine geneticist. “We determine their DNA and their blood type to establish their historical background. It also tells us how much diversity is in the herd and the minimum number we need to maintain that genetic diversity. Maybe that’s why sanctuaries keep breeding more mustangs??? Contrary to what one might think wild horses suffer from less inbreeding than their domestic cousins. We think they have more genetic diversity than any breed of domestic horses.”
I may be just a hick horse trader but isn’t lack of genetic type also interpreted as lack of a breed type? Which would make these horses nothing more than feral livestock at least genetically????? Matter of fact I heard a joke the other day about how their genetics had advanced so much they were now being born with shoes……not so funny?? It might be funnier if it weren't true in many places.
And of course all this comes with a price………Sussman invites interested people across the country to sponsor a horse for $150, or a herd for $5,000. She is betting the long term success of the ISPMB on tourism. That’s why she came to South Dakota in the first place. The state of South Dakota believes in tourism and invests in it. She is hoping to become a place where people can come and learn about the horses. Visitors can walk safely among the wild mustangs. A curious mare will sometimes follow a stranger, easing up to nuzzle an outstretched hand.
Again what was that statement about understanding how the horses shouldn’t be disrupted???
I realize the buffalo was brought back from the brink of extinction by the breeding of national park and domestic herds. The buffalo was an indigenous unique species of wildlife in danger of extinction. The mustang???? Not so much. The BLM has a problem of what to do with not only the wild population but the ones they have in captivity.
I don’t dislike mustangs because they are mustangs. I do dislike compounding a problem, the blind leading the blind, and tourist traps. Is this a kinder, gentler, politically correct Buffalo Bill dog and pony show or research????

Written by RH1
c.c. Vicki, John, slaughter…….

pictures provided by RM and the world wide web for educational purposes.

Seems the ONLY People Thrilled With the Passports Are……….

And Here Is Research On Some Common Drugs Marketed In Europe……..
I don’t think the Europeans are as thrilled about this passport business as we have been led to believe…….Don’t comment to me I didn’t write it. Only guilty of copy and paste.

---The media has been having a field day over European Union legislation requiring horse owners to supposedly undertake that they will not eat their horse.
"I hereby declare that I will not eat my horse or pony," the mass circulation tabloid, The Sun, headlined its take on the story.
Describing the new EU rules as barmy, The Sun reported that horse owners must sign a pledge not to eat their pets - or face up to two years in jail.
United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage was quoted as saying: "I'd like to be a fly on the wall when the Queen and Princess Anne are asked to sign a form saying they're not going to eat their horses."
Bloggers and the like have taken up the story with glee, providing yet more grist for the mill for those who delight in the obscure, quirky and sometimes downright bizarre twists and turns found in the growing mountain of EU regulations.
The "pledge" is part of EU regulations around horse identification which come into force in Britain on July 1.
The regulations recognize the fact that horses regularly enter the food chain in continental Europe.
The regulations will require all foals born after July 1, and horses born before June 30 that have not yet been issued with an equine passport, to have a microchip implanted by a veterinary surgeon when their owners apply for a passport.
Compulsory microchipping will aid accurate identification as it provides a permanent link between the horse and its lifetime passport, Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs explains.
The microchips, to be placed in a horse's neck by a veterinarian, will match the passport.
"Horse passports will clearly identify those horses which are not eligible for the food chain if they have been treated with substances which are potentially harmful to humans.
"By strengthening the current passport system we reduce the risk to human health, avoid the withdrawal of key veterinary medicines, and protect the horse meat trade in this country."
Microchipping will also help recover and identify stolen and abandoned horses, as well assist with welfare cases.
The new EU regulation provides for a standardized format to exclude a horse from the food chain if certain medicines are used, or to suspend its slaughter for human consumption for six months if treatment is carried out with another set of listed medications. The passport must accompany an animal to slaughter.
The so-called pledge is actually about opting an animal out of the food chain.
The regulations state: "An equine animal shall be deemed to be intended for slaughter for human consumption, unless it is irreversibly declared as not so intended in Part II of Section IX of the identification document, by the signature of:
a. the keeper or owner on his/her own discretion, or
b. the keeper and the veterinarian responsible, acting in accordance with Article 10(2) of Directive 2001/82/EC."
A horse's passport can therefore be marked accordingly, or at a later date by a vet should medications be used that disqualify the animal from the food chain.
Actually, seeing the Queen and Princess Anne signing isn't so hard to imagine after all.
If you are among the one million people in the country who owns a horse, a pony or even a donkey, you should already know that by the end of June you must have a passport for the animal. If you are one of the many millions who do not, you will probably need to look twice at that opening sentence.
A passport? For a horse? Bizarre as it seems, the Government introduced regulations shortly before Christmas requiring all equines to be in possession of a passport, whether they are traveling or not. It is, effectively, a form of ID.
In the horse world, the issue has been a hot topic for a year or more. Jokes about how to fit the animal into the photo-booth rapidly gave way to anger over the costs and bureaucracy involved. Already, organizations such as the Horse Passport Agency have sprung up offering the required document to owners who will be criminalized if they fail to comply.
There is a fine of up to £5,000 and, for a second offence, one month's imprisonment. Imagine it. You could go to jail because you forgot, or declined, to get the Shetland pony at the bottom of your garden an ID card.
You may well ask why they are needed at all since racehorses and competition horses already require some sort of identity document to travel overseas. The story, unsurprisingly, begins in Brussels, where regulations were introduced 10 years ago to ensure that horses treated with certain drugs do not enter the human food chain.
Since the British do not eat horsemeat, the UK obtained a "derogation" that ran out last year. But instead of demanding another, the Government said it was legally bound to introduce compulsory passports for all equines.
So every owner, whether of the oldest nag in the farthest field or the proudest hunter in the stableyard, will have to sketch their animal, note down its identifying markings and send this information -- known as a "silhouette" -- to an approved agency, which will charge between £20 and £30 for the document.
This may not seem like a lot of money; but, a week or so ago, the Government further decreed that owners should not identify their own horses. Instead, the "silhouette" will have to be completed by a vet, who will probably charge £30 a go.
So a passport could end up costing £50 or more. For someone who owns a riding school, or a donkey sanctuary, and is already finding it hard to make ends meet, this will be a crippling cost.
James Gray, the Tory MP for North Wiltshire and president of the Association of British Riding Schools, said around 200 schools close down every year and he feared the new passport could spell the end for many more.
The Government maintains it has consulted widely and has the support of august bodies, such as the British Horse Society, one of a number of groups empowered to issue the passports. But Mr. Gray says there is outright hostility among ordinary owners and weekend riders represented by the ABRS, the Pony Club, the Donkey Breed Association, the Shetland Pony Association and many others.
The regulations will be enforced by trading standards officers with the power to enter stables and fields to see whether the horse matches the description on the passport. "The thought of a new army of jobsworths stalking the countryside checking the paperwork of horses fills me with dismay," said Mr Gray. "It is a bureaucratic solution to a problem that doesn't even exist."
What possible justification is there for this law that will cost the industry millions of pounds to implement and could send small businesses to the wall?
Alun Michael, the "minister for the horse" at the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs, said it would establish a database "which would be to the advantage of the horse industry in the event of horse diseases becoming a problem in this country". Asked in the Commons to identify what disease he had in mind, he failed to offer an example.
Some in the industry say there are spin-off advantages, such as allowing potential buyers to check whether an animal has been stolen and discovering how many horses and ponies there are in the country. But the principle reason is set out on Defra's own website: "It will satisfy the European Commission that the UK has a viable method of identifying horses that have been treated with medicines that must not be administered to food producing animals."
Since only a few thousand horses are slaughtered in this country and exported to Europe for food, why not limit the requirement to them? Why do a million owners have to go through this rigmarole because other countries have a taste for horsemeat?
Mr. Gray -- who is tabling two Commons motions today opposed to the regulations -- says the Government intends to remove a long-standing prohibition on exporting live horses other than high-value racehorses or stud animals. Combined with the passport, he suspects many more British horses will now be sold abroad for food, which is anathema to a country that is home to one quarter of all the horses in the EU.
There is a wider issue here about how we are governed and the cavalier use of legislation. This measure was brought in by way of a Statutory Instrument and was already law before MPs even had a chance to pass judgment. Moreover, the drafting was found to be seriously defective by a parliamentary monitoring committee, something the Government acknowledged.
In addition, the regulations covered only tame animals and therefore did not include thousands of semi-wild ponies on the West Country moors and in the New Forest for which separate arrangements have been made.
Yet instead of withdrawing them, ministers simply placed the flawed regulations on the Statute Book while promising to replace them with an unflawed version at a later date in order to "avoid confusion".
As Mr Bumble would have said, this law is an ass. And it does not need a passport to be identified as one.
______________
Guess there are some “anti-government separatist loons” in the UK too….Who would have thought?

Here are a few of the “banned” drugs mentioned in the comments following the market opinion piece I seem to remember one so called vet who was adamant about ivermectin not being studied in human consumption horses….guess that wasn’t as factual as we were led to believe…..
Don’t write to tell me this is not all of the drugs…..I realize that. It’s as far as I’ve gotten for several reasons so deal with it.
An Ivermectin containing wormer marketed in the UK as Eraquell http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Eraquell-horse-wormer-Larger-Tube-Treats-700kg-Bodyweight/productinfo/ERAQUELL reads as follows: Withdrawal period Horses may be slaughtered for human consumption only after 30 days from the last treatment.
A moxidectin containing wormer in the UK is marketed as Equest: http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 32 days of treatment.
A product containing moxidectin and praziquantel is marketed in the UK as Equest Promax http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Equest-horse-wormer-gel/productinfo/EQUEST/ reads as follows: must not be slaughtered for human consumption within 64 days of treatment.
Fenbendazole , a benzimidazole wormer marketed Panacur, Exodus, and Strongid P containing pyrantel are not allowed in horses to be used for human consumption.
Mebendazole, one of the benzimidazole wormers marketed as Telmin Granules http://www.hyperdrug.co.uk/Telmin-Granules-horse-wormer/productinfo/TELG/ has this statement (might be where the 180 days is coming from) indications, warnings, etc In accordance with the Horse Passport legislation (Commission Decision 2000/68/EC as implemented in national legislation), a 6 month withdrawal period applies to the use of this product.

Trivia for the day…..to the person who held Chinese racing up for demanding a $40,000 stipend of sorts for an owner to be allowed to race a horse as a model of humane foresight by a country looking after its equine athletes……Not so sure I’d bet the ranch on how much of that is in the interest of humane retirement for horses…….. The 2005 statistics for horses killed in China, 1.7 mil …..and just in case you think I made that up, go to the study outlining unintended consequences on a horse processing ban in the U.S. prepared for http://www.animalwelfarecouncil.org/ May 15, 2006. Do you think Chinese horse slaughter has gone from 1.7 mil to 0 in these past four years? Seriously?
Stop blaming the AQHA for all the wrongs in the world….It is not their responsibility to care for anyone’s horses. This is perhaps my favorite anti-slaughter oxymoron………If you can’t afford to humanely euthanize it you shouldn’t own it/what has the AQHA (or whatever association or person needing blamed at the time) done to care for unwanted horses…….Doesn’t anyone else see the crossed points here???????
Alex Brown has proclaimed we should keep the auction/rescue infrastructure we have only to administer grants payable to same for each horse they “humanely euthanize” or adopt. Am I the only one who finds this plan repulsive on several levels???????
RH1

We Don’t Call It Rescue. Taking Care of Horses We Believe Deserve Better……..

I have fallen a bit behind on writing or commenting on the repetitive anti-slaughter delusional thinking. I apologize….I was busy with live horses. Being out of date, I don’t work on lap tops or prioritize my day to meet the needs of The Movement. When we started this thing I wrote a quip about growing up putting a matchbook under the eight track tape, please refer to that when things get slow. It doesn’t mean I am screwing someone else’s boyfriend, ex-husband, or significant other in pursuit of horse facilities. It doesn’t mean I am gathering statistics. It does not mean I have been arrested for animal neglect or cruelty. Nor does it mean I have gone away.
I see we are discussing rescues. I have a very narrow mind on the rescue issue for several reasons. I feel the only “rescues” allowed to operate under the 501c tax exemption should be those used to shelter law enforcement animal abuse seizures. Period. End of story. Everyone else can operate under the same tax codes I do. Donations are paychecks. The panhandling, manipulation, and writing of romantic horse fiction to solicit donations can continue. Forum networking twitter with other anti-slaughter people will still be available for drama fixes. Nothing will change except the tax fairy will have flown out the window. Breeders, trainers, farmers, ranchers, and all other livestock and equine operation manage to operate within the present agricultural tax laws so I don’t see a problem.
We here at the ranch and our anti-horse cohorts have been grilled about what we do. Most of our new found friends seem to think all we have done most of our lives is dream up ways to kill and keep killing horses. We don’t really like horses we are in this only for the money. I shy away from personal stories. I want to wretch every time I read a pink nylon bridle infested story about an auction rescue dragged from the kill pen and held up as proof slaughter is evil. It proves nothing more than someone got a horse they like cheap. So with that in mind, my personal program has little to do with a nationwide issue either.
I train horses. I buy and sell horses. I get most of my business from personal referrals and this feeds the misguided opinion I have that I may know a little about horses. I was contacted earlier this summer by a lady having problems with her mare on the recommendation of a mutual acquaintance. It was kind of a long drawn out tale of dumb mistakes (politically correct term, inexperienced) for which the horse was blamed.. Here’s my newly formed opinion.
If you can’t tell the difference between a good saddle and the no-fit, wither pinching, cardboard treed, urine tanned sale barn special please refrain from buying any horse whose veins can be seen through its skin, has no fetlock hair, and a shallow mouth with little thin lips. As a general rule, these horses don’t have the dumb ass tolerance you need to be safe. It may be dangerous for you and not in the best interest of the horse’s future.
Maybe those urine line draft cross “rescues” are in exactly the right hands. Maybe not, I have heard some draft crosses can make excellent saddle broncs.
This particular owner wanted a second opinion on her horse. I offered some suggestions on how to try to solve what I believed after handling the mare and seeing her owner’s tack, a pilot error/training problem and left. Several weeks later the “horselover” and her spouse decide not to spend money to have me put more training on the mare. They don’t want to spend the money for any lessons either. I don’t think they believed they needed to learn anything more. It’s best to sell the mare. I truly do realize I had an indirect hand in that decision by not offering to solve their problems simply for the personal reward of making life better for a horse. Greedy horse killing ***** that I am I wanted to be paid for either the training or the lessons. If an owner has a horse in training with me I don’t usually charge extra for trying to teach them to handle the horse.
My job in this particular case is to taking the mare to a sale. I haul sale horses for owners quite often. I charge a flat rate for a week’s worth of sale prep, and so much a mile for transport. So goes the rest of the story for this little mare.
The mare had actually, at one time, been started by someone who kind of spoke horse. She was decently (not out of this world) bred, cute made, and with some consistent riding could get pretty handy pretty quick. I don’t have time to do that. After all there is limit to what can be accomplished in 5 days. She will have to go with pretty much what she knows but she is clipped, hooves trimmed, bathed and ridden a few times. I think she is too good to kill without giving her the chance. What?????? A pro-slaughter horse dealer doesn’t want a horse to go to kill? Remember I don’t have a personal stake in whether this mare brings $210 or $2,100. I have already been paid.
Now pay attention because this is the trade secret to keeping horses out of the slaughter pipeline. I know this has become increasingly difficult over the years, K.B.s being so sneaky, underhanded, evil, and all. They live to kill horses and they will go to all lengths to feed this addiction. I am going to let you in on the solution to the problem. If everyone practiced this one thing there would be no horses killed ever. It’s called a reserve bid. Yep, that’s all it takes.
Goes kind of like this. “Jim, you workin’ the ring today”
“When don’t I”
“Well, what’s this mare worth to kill?”
Looking her over “$210, maybe $225”
“I’ll cover her to $300. I don’t need her but I think she is too good to kill. I don’t really want her but I’ll cover her that much.”
“I’ll look in the rafters for some bids.”
I didn’t end up owning the little mare. She went home with a nurse and her daughter in law who were looking for a project. She was well aware of everything I knew and didn’t know about the mare and believe it or not it doesn’t take weeks , months, or years to read a horse. There was no more stress or horror at the auction for the little mare than the first show in a horse’s career or maybe the first saddling. It was just another day at the office for both of us. It really isn’t that difficult to keep your horses (or in this particular case someone else’s) alive.
The moral to this little story….had the “horselovers” been responsible in rescues/anti-slaughter way of thinking the mare would have been dead. I would have been out my fee and the buyer would still be horseless. Had the mare not met the reserve she would be here in training now on the way to meeting the reserve and hopefully much more. Either way, she’d still be alive because of her “greedy irresponsible” owners.
Works for me….
Written by RH1