Counties Utilize New Utah Law in Wild Horse Management Dispute
Utah counties are taking a bold step by leveraging a new state law to challenge federal management of wild horses. This move has sparked a legal and environmental debate, as local officials claim that the overpopulation of wild horses poses a threat to public welfare. The situation highlights the ongoing tension between state and federal control over public lands.
Background of the Dispute
As the Shingle Creek Fire spread two years ago, officials from Kane and Iron counties were frustrated by federal land managers' refusal to allow the deployment of bulldozers. This incident, among others, led to the creation of HB164, a law empowering Utah's local governments to act on public lands when federal mismanagement is perceived to endanger public health and safety.
However, the first application of this law targets not wildfire risks but the management of federally protected wild horses. Iron and Beaver counties are threatening to remove these horses from the West Desert range, potentially violating the 1971 federal Wild Horses and Burros Act.
Legal Implications and State Support
Utah taxpayers might bear the cost of defending these actions if they contravene federal law. The new state law provides counties with some protection, as the Utah Attorney General's office may defend them in court if federal legal action is taken. To qualify for this defense, counties must prove that the horse overpopulation poses an 'imminent threat' to public health, safety, and welfare.
Iron County has already consulted with the Attorney General's office, which is yet to define what constitutes such a threat, according to Harry Souvall, head of the AG's public lands division.
Expanding the Law's Reach
HB164 was designed to give counties more influence over how the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service manage lands within their borders. A related bill, HB67, expanded the law's scope to include lands managed by the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, requiring counties to consult with the Utah Attorney General before taking action on federal land.
The Wild Horse Challenge
Iron County Commissioner Dave Miller argues that the BLM's failure to control horse numbers effectively authorizes counties to act. He claims that the federal wild horses law requires the Department of Interior to remove horses if their numbers exceed recommended thresholds.
Ranchers, who have a 'property right' to graze public lands, argue that reducing grazing to accommodate excess horses is an illegal 'taking.' Conversely, horse welfare advocates argue that it is the ranchers' cattle, grazing at subsidized rates, that damage the range.
Meanwhile, the BLM spends $72 million annually on its wild horse program, which includes gathering horses, administering contraceptives, and facilitating adoptions. Over 50,000 horses are corralled at significant public expense.
The counties have agreed to delay any roundups until July, after foaling season, despite claiming that horses are causing significant damage as spring forage emerges. The BLM has begun an environmental review of a proposal to remove several hundred horses from the affected areas, but this plan must compete for funding with other BLM initiatives.
For further details, see the original article by The Salt Lake Tribune.