Judge Upholds Permanent Removal of Oregon Wild Horses
August 10, 2018
In a significant ruling, a federal judge has upheld the permanent removal of wild horses from Eastern Oregon, despite acknowledging that an emergency roundup violated environmental law. This decision has sparked debate among conservationists and government officials.
Background of the Case
Earlier this year, U.S. District Judge Michael Simon found that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) did not adequately review an “emergency gather” of approximately 150 horses following a 2016 wildfire, which was a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Despite this, Judge Simon determined that the BLM's oversight was not severe enough to reverse the decision to permanently remove the horses from the 62,500-acre Three Fingers Horse Management Area in Malheur County.
Legal Challenges and Arguments
Friends of Animals, a nonprofit organization, sued the BLM over the roundup and requested that Judge Simon vacate the permanent removal decision. This would have allowed for the possibility of the horses being returned to the area. However, the judge's ruling allows the BLM to conduct an environmental review while the removal decision remains in effect.
“Although the current state of the HMA is somewhat in dispute, there is sufficient evidence to find a risk of harm to the HMA if the removed horses were to be returned at this time,” Judge Simon stated. “The evidence suggests that this could negatively affect the range’s future ability to provide a viable habitat for wild horses and would be inconsistent with applicable Land Use Plans and other land management plans currently in place.”
Impact on Local Ranchers
Wild horses are a concern for ranchers in Eastern Oregon, where cattle often rely on grazing resources on public lands. The ruling was issued on August 9, following oral arguments in Portland regarding potential legal remedies for the BLM's NEPA violation.
Arguments from Both Sides
Michael Harris, attorney for Friends of Animals, argued that the BLM's error was significant because the agency overlooked the environmental impact of removing most horses from the northern pasture of the horse management area. “That’s a real change in the dynamics of the landscape,” Harris said.
He emphasized that wild horses have a strong “site fidelity,” meaning those in the HMA’s southern pasture are likely to remain there rather than migrate across rugged terrain to the north. “De facto, it’s like a border change of the HMA,” Harris added. “This is just a completely unanalyzed consequence that was made under an emergency decision.”
Lucinda Bach, representing the government, countered that horses do move between pastures, citing a recent aerial survey that showed an increase in the northern pasture's horse population. “The record doesn’t show horses can’t move back and forth,” she said. “In fact, it shows they can move back and forth.”
Future Implications
By the time the northern pasture is expected to recover from the fire in the spring of 2019, the horse population will likely have naturally grown closer to the maximum “appropriate management level” for the area, according to Bach. “It makes no sense to return horses to the HMA and then accelerate the need for another gather,” she said.
Harris countered that horses will primarily multiply in the southern pasture, concentrating the population in that segment. “We think it will exacerbate the need for roundups,” he said.
Originally posted by Capital Press