Judge Sides with Wild Horse Advocates Against Ranchers

Wild horse advocates in the U.S. West have achieved a significant legal victory against ranchers seeking to reduce wild horse populations on public lands. Represented by Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal in Washington D.C., the advocates successfully defended against a lawsuit filed by ranchers who wanted the federal government to thin the horse herd to reduce competition with their cattle for resources.

Livestock interests in Nevada, represented by Hoffman Test Guinan & Collier, requested a federal judge to enforce the removal of thousands of horses under the 1971 Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. They argued that the current horse population exceeded the optimum size needed to maintain ecological balance.

"Nothing in the act imposes a preference for horse or burro over livestock and wildlife," the ranchers argued in a 2013 complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.

U.S. District Judge Miranda Du dismissed the ranchers' lawsuit on March 13, agreeing with horse advocates that the court lacked jurisdiction. The American Wild Horse Conservation (formerly American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign), which intervened in the case, argued that there was no agency action for the court to review.

Population Concerns

The 2015 population of wild horses and burros was estimated at 49,209 over 32 million acres of public land in 10 western states, according to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The appropriate population level set by the bureau is 26,684, considering other wildlife, permitted livestock, and environmental factors.

Lawsuits with similar claims are pending in Utah, Wyoming, and Pershing County, Nevada. William Eubanks, representing the American Wild Horse Conservation, noted that the Nevada ruling provides additional support for their case.

"Now that we have a federal judge who has ruled for us on this issue, this provides an additional bit of ammunition," said Eubanks.

Horse advocates emphasize that the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act protects these animals as a national aesthetic resource, while the Taylor Grazing Act allows ranchers to use public land without granting compensable rights.

The case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada is Nevada Association of Counties and Nevada Farm Bureau Federation v. U.S. Department of Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, Case No. 3:13-cv-00712.

For the plaintiffs: John Hoffman of Hoffman Test Guinan & Collier

For the respondents: William Eubanks, Katherine Meyer, and Michelle Sinnott of Meyer, Glitzenstein & Crystal and Julie Cavanaugh-Bill of Cavanaugh-Bill Law Offices

Originally Posted By Reuters