Interior Department Should Not Remove the Ovaries of Wild Horses
July 20, 2018
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the Interior Appropriations bill, a significant piece of legislation funding various government programs, including the National Park Service and the Environmental Protection Agency. This bill often becomes a battleground for controversial riders affecting our nation's wildlife, and this year is no different. A new provision threatens some of our most iconic animals: wild horses, symbols of freedom for many Americans.
Under an amendment by Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a proponent of reducing wild horse populations, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management could initiate a mass surgical sterilization program for stallions and mares.
A diverse group of stakeholders acknowledges the need for effective wild horse population management. However, it is crucial to implement humane fertility control options that the American public supports. Using tax dollars for surgical sterilizations is irresponsible.
Stewart’s amendment overlooks humane fertility control methods like porcine zona pellucida (PZP), an immunocontraceptive vaccine that is safe to administer. In contrast, surgical sterilization involves a risky, stressful, painful, and invasive procedure.
Conducting ovariectomies, or removing mares' ovaries, is complex and costly. Ideally, horses undergoing this procedure would be under general anesthesia and monitored closely. Wild horses, however, would likely receive only local anesthesia, increasing the risk of complications in a nonsterile environment.
The National Academies of Sciences, in a 2013 report, stated that ovariectomies are “inadvisable for field application” due to the risk of “prolonged bleeding or peritoneal infection.”
It is unclear if the Bureau of Land Management has fully considered the costs and feasibility of a mass surgical sterilization program. Any proposal should address pain relief, antibiotics for infections, long-term health and behavioral effects, individual care, and safe handling of wild animals.
For an agency claiming insufficient resources to manage wild horses and burros, funding mass sterilizations is fiscally unsound. If unsuccessful, it could lead to renewed calls for culling herds to reduce numbers.
Wild horses are protected by the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, which allows these “living symbols of the West” to thrive on public lands. This rider undermines the law’s intent, as mass sterilizations would result in nonreproducing herds and nonviable populations.
As lawmakers work to reconcile the Senate and House versions of the Interior bill, rejecting this misguided approach to herd management is crucial.
Joanna Grossman, Ph.D., is the equine protection manager at the Washington, D.C.-based Animal Welfare Institute.
Originally posted by The Hill