Sign the petition to let lawmakers know we will not stand for euthanasia, slaughter, or any other means of destruction that results in the death of wild horses and burros!

Time is short, so please sign, share, and ask your friends to sign today! 

STOP EUTHANASIA of U.S. Wild Horses – YES to LIFE!




In a recent article on the plight of our American Wild Horses, particularly in Utah, our elected officials showed their teeth. They have clearly become the governing body for corporations and NOT the American people.

The end of the article is just one of many, many exchanges we have seen that illustrate our point. Scott Beckstead, from the Humane Society of the United States, was chastised for speaking for the American people. We think when the polls show that the American people lean heavily on the side of protection of our wild horses from slaughter or euthanasia (of healthy or unadopted wild horses and burros that have been rounded up and removed from their lands), it is pretty obvious that he CAN in fact be a voice for the majority of Americans. Does Rep. Derrin Owens have a clue how Americans feel? I don’t think our government can speak for the majority anymore!

We have seen the blatant lies of over population, starvation and a mismanagement that created a fiscal crisis for the Bureau of Land Management. These are US Code, Title 18 violations. The push this past year to concrete these lies in the minds of unknowing politicians, to lead our lawmakers to strike out against protection of wild horses and burros, has been a carefully crafted plan laid out by special interest groups.

If you look back over a hundred years to the Sage Brush Rebellion, you can see the step by step plan to gain control over the rest of the American ‘open’ or public lands for corporate use (nearly free). Is there any politician who is listening? Is there one who cares? Is there one who will stand up against the bullies, the militias, the corporations?

Scott Beckstead is one voice that does speak for the majority of Americans, but this article, about a closed door meeting coming up in August, shows without a doubt that our lawmakers do not hear us. “National wild horse forum planned in Utah; Zinke may attend”  They sit in their meetings discussing how they will destroy our wild horses and burros.

 This is the quote from the article that the majority of the American  take issue with: “Beckstead countered that any discussion that turns on broadening the “management tools” for wild horses implies slaughter or euthanasia as an answer, when politicians and land managers should be looking at the number of privately owned cattle on public land.
In Utah, he pointed out, there are 22 million acres set aside for cattle for forage, while wild horses graze on 2 million acres.
Rep. Derrin Owens, R-Fountain Green, criticized Beckstead’s comments on how Americans feel regarding the ways to manage wild horse populations.
“I don’t know where you get the authority to speak on behalf of all the American people,” he said. “I resent that. You don’t have the authority to speak for all American people.”


Senate Appropriations Members:
Alabama: Richard Shelby (202) 224-5744
Alaska: Lisa Murkowski (202)-224-6665
Arkansas: John Boozman (202) 224-4843
California: Dianne Feinstein (202) 224-3841
Connecticut: Chris Murphy (202) 224-4041
Delaware: Chris Coons (202) 224-5042
Florida: Marco Rubio (202) 224-3041
Hawaii: Brian Schatz (202) 224-3934
Illinois: Richard Durbin (202) 224-2152
Kansas: Jerry Moran (202) 224-6521
Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (202) 224-2541
Louisiana: John Kennedy (202) 228-0447
Maine: Susan Collins (202) 224-2523
Maryland: Chris Van Hollen (202) 224-4654
Mississippi: Thad Cochran (202) 224-5054
Missouri: Roy Blunt (202) 224-5721
Montana: Steve Daines & Jon Tester (202) 224-2651 & (202) 224-2644
New Hampshire: Jeanne Shaheen (202) 224-2841
New Mexico: Tom Udall (202) 224-6621
North Dakota: John Hoeven (202) 224-2551
Oklahoma: James Lankford (202) 224-5754
Oregon: Jeff Merkley 202) 224-3753
Rhode Island: Jack Reed (202) 224-4642
South Carolina: Lindsey Graham (202) 224-5972
Tennessee: Lamar Alexander (202) 224-4944
Vermont: Patrick Leahy (202) 224-4242
Washington: Patty Murray (202) 224-2621
West Virginia: Joe Manchin & Shelley Moore Capito (202) 224-3954 & (202) 224-6472
Wisconsin: Tammy Baldwin 202-224-5653



What it means for wild horses of the West.

Screenshot 2017-07-22 05.49.55

This is what is posted on the House Appropriations page…..doesn’t make much clear does it? Let’s take a look at what the bill said originally and what the change is, and the final, adopted version (by the House Full Committee)…..

Screenshot 2017-07-22 05.45.03

So what does the wording change mean —

The statement – in the original (the first paragraph in the above photo), funds are not available for the destruction of healthy or unadopted horses OR sale resulting in processing or commercial products

The definition – destruction of healthy or unadopted – Euthanasia

sale resulting in processing or commercial products – Slaughter

The statement – in the final version (the last paragraph in the above photo), funds are not available for the sale of…resulting in destruction for processing into products or meat

The definition – sale resulting in destruction for products or meat – Slaughter


So where are we right now?

The House Full committee has voted in the Stewart Amendment leaving us with the last version, which does not allow funds for ‘slaughter’ but has taken out language restricting ‘euthanasia’.

The Bill however, must still be approved by the Full House, and it still has to be heard and approved by the Senate Subcommittee, Full Committee and Full Senate.

Each of these bills goes through a sub and full committee of each the House and Senate, and also must be passed by the “Floor” in each the Full House, and Full Senate. Another way to look at this:

How does a Bill to get to completion?

House (sub)committee A + House (larger) (full) Committee B + House Full Membership (all the Representatives) (sometimes called the Floor) C = Full House Adoption (passing of the Bill by the House of Reps.) D

Senate (sub)committee E + Senate (larger) (full) Committee F + Senate Full Membership (all the Senators) (sometimes called the Floor)G = Full Senate Adoption (passing of the Bill by the Senate) H

D + H = FY 2018 Budget Appropriations Act  (The done deal)

What can we do at this stage?

  1. Call your Representative:  Find My Rep. and let them know you do not want them to pass this bill with the Stewart Amendment which allows funding to be used to euthanize horses (No Slaughter OR Euthanizing healthy or unadoptable horses)
  2. Call the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee (we recommend just making the time to contact the entire committee because they are fast-tracking these bills!)


As always, if these articles, and information are useful to you, please consider helping Citizens Against Equine Slaughter stay in the fight for our nation’s beautiful, majestic equines. You can support us by volunteering or through donations by clicking on the Donate button found on this website. We are all volunteer, and our only mission is to protect the lives and homes of these sentient beings.




We are getting different reports on the Interior budget now, Chris Stewart introduced a bill, and listening to the hearing where he did, they CLEARLY spoke about humane euthanasia of our wild horses in holding…however, we cannot find it in the Bill that has been approved by the full House Committee. In fact, 3 of us have now scoured the internet for the amendment he offered up to looks at the specific language in it, because we heard them vote it in, Rep Stewart even bragged about it on social media posts…however, it is NOWHERE to be found. So, we had our UT person contact his office to see if we can get a copy of the amendment, and his own office asked CAES, Jen Howe “You know it didn’t pass right” — We are scratching our heads, we went back and watched it again, it is the July 18 full committee hearing for the Interior appropriations, it definitely passed that round, and there have been no meetings on the Interior budget since then, in fact at the end of the hearing they passed the entire bill. So we are at a loss right now and worried about the fact that we cannot find the amendment anywhere. What does it say? We heard them discussing humane euthanasia, but claiming no slaughter, which is not what was approved according to the language in the Interior FY 2018 Bill passed by the house on 18, July, 2017.

Are you confused? WE ARE!

The Agriculture budget was much easier. It is passed the markup rounds of the Senate, and Senator Udall did get his amendment passed. He introduced language to stop and federal funds from going to USDA inspection for horses thereby stopping the possibility of slaughterhouses reopening in this country. He did not push for the SAFE Act so they can still be transported to slaughter. He also left out that tiny detail, you know, the one that say BLM can’t use funds for the destruction of healthy or unadoptable wild horses.There is vague language in the Interior budget prohibiting that however. The problem we see with the 2 bills right now is the transfer of wild horses to state agencies for use as work horses, and when they “say” those agencies cannot slaughter them….and that they have lost their federal protection, it means they cannot enforce the not going to slaughter.

It is a pesky little detail of law that says the federal government can’t tell the state what to do with their property. Sorry, I know that sounds awful, but wild horses are legally labelled as ‘property’. The bill doesn’t include any finances for an agency to oversee the program, track the horses or any other situation in which the statement ‘may not’ be used as commercial products, is not enforceable!

What can you do?
Write, call, fax, tweet your senators, and the senators on the appropriations committee (committee & contacts at the bottom of this article) and tell them:

The transfer of animals to agencies for work purposes or any other purpose must be stricken from the Interior Budget proposal. As approved by the House, nothing in the budget allows for oversight, tracking or any method for accountability, to make sure the wild horses do not end up being sent to slaughter. They must retain federal protections if transferred to an ‘entity’ and that cannot be done without changing the “title” policy for a wild horse, giving ownership to the purchaser or entity receiving the horse.

  • List for Senators on the Subcommittee for the Agriculture Approps Bill: (The Chairman is priority, then ranking member and then the rest of the subcommittee)
    You can go to each of their websites and click on contact me. I believe there was only one that asked for a zip code, but you can mail them from their websites. they can all be found @ Senate Appropriation Members

John Hoeven, Chairman
P: 202-224-2551

Jeff Merkley, Ranking Member
Phone: (202) 224-3753
Fax: (202) 228-3997

Thad Cochran
Phone: (202) 224-5054

Patrick Leahy
Phone: (202) 224-4242

Mitch McConnell
Phone: (202) 224-2541
Fax: (202) 224-2499

Dianne Feinstein
Phone: (202) 224-3841
Fax: (202) 228-3954

Susan Collins
Main: (202)224-2523
Fax: (202)224-2693

Jon Tester
Phone: (202) 224-2644
Fax: (202) 224-8594

(202) 224-6621

Roy Blunt
Phone: (202) 224-5721

Jerry Moran
Phone: (202) 224-6521
Fax: (202) 228-6966

Tammy Baldwin
Phone: (202) 224-5653

Marco Rubio
(202) 224-3041

Representatives Stewart, Amodei, and Simpson Mislead Interior Appropriations Committee to Vote for Mass Euthanasia of Wild Horses

screenshot-www youtube com 2017-07-19 01-33-22

Representatives Chris Stewart (UT),  Mark Amodei (NV), and Mike Simpson (ID) mislead the Interior Appropriations committee in order to trick representatives into voting for MASS EUTHANASIA of U.S. Wild Horses. (A voice vote was taken so they cannot individually be held accountable.) Video of the Interior Appropriations Committee meeting is posted below.

Watch Video Here:


Contact your House Reps here:

Contact your Senate Reps here:

Read more about Representative Amodei’s violation of U.S. criminal code, Title 18 here: Representative Amodei Violates US Criminal Code, Title 18

Press Contact:
Val Cecama Hogsett

Appropriations Hearings for the week of July 17

Speck, Ivory and Crackerjack

Schedule and action to be taken

July 18 both at 10:30 a.m. EST


  1. House Appropriations Full Committee

    To consider Full Committee Markup of the Interior Approps bill

    No link to watch yet. (We will update here when it is provided.)

  2. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee

Markup of the Agriculture Approps Bill

Watch at this link:

What are the main issues:

The Interior Budget still has the language that was passed in the omnibus bill for the FY 2017 budget. That amended the Wild Free Roaming & Burros Act of 1971. It was written to allow entities to buy or adopt horses or burros. Until this amendment was sneakily passed through only an individual could purchase or adopt horses, and there was a 4 horse or burro limit per individual.

Why is this troubling…because even though it has wording that no agency or entity who adopts the horses or burros will send them to slaughter, or euthanize them without recommendation by a veterinarian, there is no oversight. There is no budget for anyone, no tracking designation that says “you the BLM” or “you the Sec of the Int” are given the task of tracking the animals, and making sure that they are only destroyed via humane euthanasia upon recommendation.

This means that just like an individual who adopts a horse, and is given title after one year, any person who adopts or buys (title given immediately with a sale) has the ability to do whatever they want with them. They have lost Federal protections.

This is just as troubling and urgent as the Agriculture Bill which omitted the language that keeps the USDA Inspections of horse meat from being funded, and also deleted the restriction that would not allow BLM to use any funds for the destruction of healthy or unadoptable wild horses or burros. So this bill if passed will allow horse slaughter for both domestic and wild.


You can contact both the committees that are hearing these bills on Tuesday and below is a blurb that you can use, modify or write your own, but please make those contacts. The complete list of committee members for each bill is below the possible blurbs we have provided here:

  • Interior:
    • Dear Representative ________, please demand that the Department of Interior Appropriations Bill for FY 2018 be sent back to the committee. Representative Chris Stewart violated Title 18 of the US Criminal Code and provided false information in the previous hearings. The decision to allow entities to adopt wild horses was based on false information that there is an overpopulation, or thousands of starving horses in the wild. This was in the testimony Citizens Against Equine Slaughter sent to the Appropriations Committee for inclusion in the record. The amendment should therefore be repealed, and the budget for FY 18 should have none of the language of entities or agencies receiving federally protected animals until this is addressed. Population and starvation claims must be investigated.  Then the language would have to be reintroduced, with some budget for the agency or person responsible for tracking animals transferred to ensure they do not go to slaughter once transferred, as is stated now, but not budgeted for.
  • Agriculture:
    • Dear Senator______________,  the Agriculture Appropriations Bill that has been passed by the House must be sent back to them. Representative Mark Amodei committed violation of the US Criminal Code, Title 18 § (subsection) 1018 providing false information to the Government, when he stated that a NGO had sued the BLM regarding birth control experimentation in Oregon with the result that the government had no alternative to warehousing wild horses outside of slaughter. The Bill only passed the Full House by 2 votes which very easily could have been swayed by this misleading information presented by Representative Amodei. 80% of Americans do not want slaughter. Lies to meet the agenda of special interest groups have got to be investigated.
    • I also would like to add that no slaughter is humane,  even in this country is , which is proven by the method used to stun the horse. This method is used in Mexico, Canada and would be here, just as it was in the past. With only 3,000 horses per state going to slaughter annually, there would be no demand for a slaughterhouse in each state, meaning long transportation for equines would still exist if this bill passes. So this means the only real agenda to get this bill passed is the push to kill the 50,000 plus wild horses  & burros in holding, which is unacceptable.


  • List for Senators on the Subcommittee for the Agriculture Approps Bill: (The Chairman is priority, then ranking member and then the rest of the subcommittee)

John Hoeven, Chairman
P: 202-224-2551

Jeff Merkley, Ranking Member
Phone: (202) 224-3753
Fax: (202) 228-3997

Thad Cochran
Phone: (202) 224-5054

Patrick Leahy
Phone: (202) 224-4242

Mitch McConnell
Phone: (202) 224-2541
Fax: (202) 224-2499

Dianne Feinstein
Phone: (202) 224-3841
Fax: (202) 228-3954

Susan Collins
Main: (202)224-2523
Fax: (202)224-2693

Jon Tester
Phone: (202) 224-2644
Fax: (202) 224-8594

(202) 224-6621

Roy Blunt
Phone: (202) 224-5721

Jerry Moran
Phone: (202) 224-6521
Fax: (202) 228-6966

Tammy Baldwin
Phone: (202) 224-5653

Marco Rubio
(202) 224-3041




Wild horse or mustang

On Wed. 12 July, 2017 The full House committee for appropriations for the Department of Agriculture’s FY 2018 budget FAILED.  We still hold hope that the Senate will introduce the language removed in section 767 of the Ag. budget.

The Interior FY 18 budget was passed without dangerous language to use ‘all tools’ available, which we knew meant slaughter. However, the bill still has some troubling language for CAES’ Oregon Wild Horse & Burro Association Director, Val Cecama-Hogsett.

What happened in the Department of Agriculture Appropriation hearing?

Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.) raised an amendment continuing the ban on commercial horse slaughter in the U.S., citing issues of animal abuse and public health.

Roybal-Allard said that 80 percent of Americans oppose commercial horse slaughter; it is impossible to humanely slaughter horses due to their unique biology; and drug residue after veterinary treatment of horses as companion animals would make the meat unfit for human consumption.

Opposing the amendment, Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) said the ban on horse slaughter in the U.S. merely moves the slaughter of horses to Mexico and Canada, where it is not as well-regulated as it would be in the U.S.

What happened in the Department of Interior Appropriation hearing?

The language to use ‘all tools’ in the 1971 Wild Free Roaming Horses & Burros Act of 1971, was removed before the bill passed the full House Committee. That language coupled with the anonymous tip received by the Cloud Foundation (Secretary Zinke directing BLM holding facilities to inventory horses by age and weight) told us that slaughter was clearly the ‘tool’ they want to use.

We are relieved that was removed, however, we are still not happy with the language in the Stewart Amendment from 2017 that makes the unrestricted sale of horses to entities possible. While the current bill states that no agency who receives horses (via this amendment authority) is not to slaughter any horse they buy or receive through transfer. We saw during the situation with Tom Davis, that this wording is not enforceable. Once these horses lose their Federal protections through a sale or transfer, they cannot tell the states or state agencies what they can legally do with them.

There is not budget included for oversight, tracking or implementing any program that ensures these stipulations are followed. Their is no protocol put in place for sick, lame or retired horses. i.e. where do they go in one of these circumstances?  The language is too vague, and even those it says states MAY not….. it is NOT enforceable and we know that after watching BLM and Tom Davis sell nearly 1,800 horses down the slaughter pipeline.


What action can you take this week?

On Sunday and Monday  July 16 – 17 contact your Representative regarding the Interior FY 2018 budget. The bill moves to the House of Representative Floor, and this is where your representative, will vote on the bill as the committee marked it up during previous hearings.

Here is what you can say:

I am calling today to ask Representative _______________ to reject the Interior budget because it does not protect wild horses, sold or transferred, to states or agencies, without tracking, oversight or protocol, for those horses that may become ill, injured or retired from being sold to kill buyers for slaughter. The current language is not enforceable.

Full Committee member list:


  • Rodney P. Frelinghuysen, New Jersey, Chairman
  • Harold Rogers, Kentucky
  • Robert B. Aderholt, Alabama
  • Kay Granger, Texas
  • Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
  • John Abney Culberson, Texas
  • John R. Carter, Texas
  • Ken Calvert, California
  • Tom Cole, Oklahoma
  • Mario Diaz-Balart, Florida
  • Charles W. Dent, Pennsylvania
  • Tom Graves, Georgia
  • Kevin Yoder, Kansas
  • Steve Womack, Arkansas
  • Jeff Fortenberry, Nebraska
  • Thomas J. Rooney, Florida
  • Charles J. Fleischmann, Tennessee
  • Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington
  • David P. Joyce, Ohio
  • David G. Valadao, California
  • Andy Harris, MD, Maryland
  • Martha Roby, Alabama
  • Mark E. Amodei, Nevada
  • Chris Stewart, Utah
  • David Young, Iowa
  • Evan H. Jenkins, West Virginia
  • Steven Palazzo, Mississippi
  • Dan Newhouse, Washington
  • John R. Moolenaar, Michigan
  • Scott Taylor, Virginia


  • Nita M. Lowey, New York
  • Marcy Kaptur, Ohio
  • Peter J. Visclosky, Indiana
  • José E. Serrano, New York
  • Rosa L. DeLauro, Connecticut
  • David E. Price, North Carolina
  • Lucille Roybal-Allard, California
  • Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., Georgia
  • Barbara Lee, California
  • Betty McCollum, Minnesota
  • Tim Ryan, Ohio
  • C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Maryland
  • Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida
  • Henry Cuellar, Texas
  • Chellie Pingree, Maine
  • Mike Quigley, Illinois
  • Derek Kilmer, Washington
  • Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania
  • Grace Meng, New York
  • Mark Pocan, Wisconsin
  • Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts
  • Pete Aguilar, California


On Sunday and Monday  July 16 – 17 contact the following Senators, regarding the Agriculture FY 2018 budget.  The This bill was passed by the House and now moves to the Senate subcommittee. The Senators on the committee need to hear from us.

Here is what you can say:

I am calling today to ask Senator ____________________  re-introduce the language that was removed from the budget (section 767) which kept the ban in place for USDA inspections of horse meat, and put a restriction on the BLM from using funds for the destruction of healthy or unadoptable wild horses. With only 3 thousand horses per state going to slaughter annually, there is no need for slaughter in this country. The number of horses going to slaughter across the borders annually have dropped. The crisis over wild horses was manufactured by several groups and politicians who want the horses gone for their own corporate interests, as proven in recent claims by Citizens Against Equine Slaughter with formal complaints of Title 18 violations of the US Criminal Code, specifically by Representative Chris Stewart and Representative Amodei. Wild horses need to be managed on the range. If the Senator will not re-introduce this language please ask him/her to support it if it is re-introduced.



Thad Cochran
Phone: (202) 224-5054

Patrick Leahy
Phone: (202) 224-4242

Mitch McConnell
Phone: (202) 224-2541
Fax: (202) 224-2499

Patty Murray
Phone: (202) 224-2621
Fax: (202) 224-0238

Richard Shelby
p: (202) 224-5744

Dianne Feinstein
Phone: (202) 224-3841
Fax: (202) 228-3954

Lamar Alexander
Phone: (202) 224-4944
Fax: (202) 228-3398

Richard Durbin
p: 202.224.2152
f: 202.228.0400

Susan Collins
Main: (202)224-2523
Fax: (202)224-2693

Jack Reed
T: (202) 224-4642
F: (202) 224-4680

Lisa Murkowski KEY CONTACT
Phone: (202)-224-6665
Fax: (202)-224-5301

Jon Tester
Phone: (202) 224-2644
Fax: (202) 224-8594

Lindsey Graham
Office: (202) 224-5972
Fax: (202) 224-3808

(202) 224-6621

Roy Blunt
Phone: (202) 224-5721

Jeanne Shaheen
Ph: (202) 224-2841

Jerry Moran
Phone: (202) 224-6521
Fax: (202) 228-6966

Jeff Merkley KEY CONTACT
Phone: (202) 224-3753
Fax: (202) 228-3997

John Hoeven
P: 202-224-2551

Christopher Coons
Phone:(202) 224-5042

John Boozman
Phone: (202) 224-4843

Brian Schatz
PHONE: (202) 224-3934
FAX: (202) 228-1153

Shelley Moore Capito
Phone: 202-224-6472

Tammy Baldwin
Phone: (202) 224-5653

James Lankford
Phone: (202) 224-5754
Fax: (202) 228-1015

Chris Murphy
@SenMurphyOffice & @ChrisMurphyCT
P: (202) 224-4041
F: (202) 224-9750

Steve Daines
p: (202) 224-2651

Joe Manchin
Phone: 304-342-5855
Fax: 304-343-7144

John Kennedy
Phone: (202) 224-4623
Fax: (202) 228-0447

Chris Van Hollen
Phone (202) 224-4654
Fax: (202) 228-0629

Marco Rubio
(202) 224-3041


Please make your calls…..our horses depend on YOU to be their voice!

When emailing or if hand delivering messages to your politicians please feel free to include both of the Title 18 Violation press releases we shared on our website.
Amodei Title 18 Violation

Stewart Title 18 Violation


If you have further questions please email us at:

Or call the office at: 541.315.6650

As always if you want to support us through volunteering, or donating follow the links or contacts on our website to do so 🙂

Sincerely grateful to all the horse warriors in this fight with us,


Representative Amodei Violates US Criminal Code, Title 18

CAES letterhead

Press Release: US Representative Amodei testified yesterday 7/12/17 in the House Appropriations Committee illegally “misleading”[1] Congress and the nation, regarding extreme animal cruelty of in field sterilization experiments planned in Oregon.
Per CAES legislative liaison Val Cecama Hogsett, Mr Amodei made a statement to the committee that an NGO had sued the BLM regarding birth control experimentation in Oregon with the result that the government had no alternative to warehousing wild horses outside of slaughter.
The NGO referenced was CAES. The experimentation referenced was in fact not “birth control” but in field sterilization via ovariectomy and colpotomy of 200 wild mares in different stages of pregnancy. This is extreme animal cruelty and was indeed halted by the suit[2] filed pro se by Patience O’Dowd in an administrative Appeal by CAES.
CAES believes Representative Amodei’s statement mislead the Congress and the nation to think that there is no viable alternative to slaughter or euthanasia when clearly CAES and Wild Horse Advocates and scientists are overwhelmingly promoting feasible and humane “On Range Management” by birth control PZP immuno-contraception as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. Sadly, this esteemed and feasible recommendation was not even mentioned in committee.
The result was a very close vote in this committee of 27 to 25 to allow horse slaughter in the United States. CAES believes Representative Amodei’s testimony clearly is in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1001 – Statements or entries generally
It is well known that our nation is strongly opposed to horse slaughter[3], hence some of our representatives work in a stealthy manner to re-install this unnecessary abhorrent special interest practice.

Congress must not try to mislead in order to obtain this result so clearly against our national culture.

CAES is submitting a title 18 complaint against Representative Amodei.

Respectfully submitted this 13th day of July, 2017
Dr. Lester Castor Friedlander D.V.M., president of Citizens Against Equine Slaughter

Press Contact:
Val Cecama Hogsett

[1] The House of Representatives Full Appropriations Committee

[2] BLM Motion to Vacate and Remand in Citizens Against Equine Slaughter, et al. 20160909-CAES-IBLA-Motion-to-VR-Mare-Sterilization-Research-EA

[3] ASPCA Press Release, Research Confirms Americans Strongly Oppose Slaughter of Horses


East Pershing Complex Gather Plan Public Comment


NEPA Document Number: DOI-BLM-NV-W010-2017-0009-EA

Location of Proposed Action: Pershing, Humboldt, Churchill, and Lander Counties.

Name and Location of Preparing Office: Humboldt River Field Office, Winnemucca Nevada Subject Code/Case File/Serial Number: 4700

Citizens Against Equine Slaughter finds that the BLM should choose Alternative C, or No Action on this proposed EA for the reasons outlined in this public comment.

Taking a preserve (HA) created by federal mandate and micro-managing herd management areas (HMA)within the HA was never authorized under any Congressional Act.

Micromanagement is defined as: ​to control every part of a situation, even small details. So the entire HA is not managed as a whole ecosystem, therefore cannot achieve a thriving natural ecosystem pursuant to the WFRHBA.

Hence it is not managed like Yellowstone National Park where predators and prey and environment are interacting in a natural manner. It is also not being managed like Assateague National Park. Both of these National Parks are profitable and are both under the Department of Interior. The Department of Interior might ought to “tier” their learning. The point here is that a natural balance can exist and the DOI understands how to do this and how lucrative it is.

WHO CARES about comparing a non-native species such as Bovine from Asia with horses. This is patently ridiculous and irrelevant. What ought to be compared is the fact that cattle are non-native, and their mouths do not contain upper front teeth and hence pull on plants and hence destructive. Of ALL the other grazers being ruminants are lacking in upper front teeth, hence equines are needed and necessary grazers on the range, and moreover, less destructive. The horses act as a lawn mower would for a human maintained lawn, the physical act of mowing promotes healthy growth of the plant. Their roaming activity also promotes biodiversity when paired with their mowing. Livestock such as cows or sheep, wrap their tongue around a plant either tearing it or pulling it out by the roots, both of which do not promote regrowth.

Comparing cattle to wild horses is also ridiculous given the relative numbers. This comparison is clearly unequal protection under the law and is also not scientific.

The EA has been written under current LAW. If the LAWS change the EA needs to start ALL over again.

Crucial information is not provided in the EA to support the actions proposed in the alternatives, including but not limited to:

  • All ungulate numbers must be detailed over the last 50 yrs.
  • Rainfall must be detailed over the last 100 yrs.
  • All grazing permits must be detailed.
  • The BLM must provide the full detail on all and any sterilizations for male or female.

Gearing things principally toward the livestock industry is in fact unequal protection under the law as well as going against the principle use purpose of the WH&B Act.

The BLM hasn’t provided a feasible, humane, safe, transparent, and culturally acceptable alternative to promote a natural thriving ecology providing equal protection under the law.

CAES suggests the following Alternative :

On Range Wild Horse Management via predators or PZP only.

  • Helicopter usage only for application of PZP, one band at a time, in the areas where native predators are unacceptable to the BLM, for reasons which the BLM should detail
  • Bait trapping one family at a time for the purpose of darting is also humane and feasible
  • Addition of predators in the most remote areas where the BLM refuses to utilize PZP
  • Cameras on the bottom of helicopters in all directions
  • Mix 40 darts of PZP at one time
  • Dart one family at a time for a short period
  • Dartable PZP should be used

The FLPMA and PRIA both state that multiple use policies were to be used to determine land uses, however it also stated it would not override any other land use policy.

  • Sec. 101. [43 U.S .C . 1701 note] This Act may be cited as the “Federal Land Policy and​
    Management Act of 1976”. DECLARATION OF POLICY Sec. 102. [43 U.S .C . 1701] (a) The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that– (b) The policies of this Act shall become effective only as specific statutory authority for their implementation is enacted by this Act or by subsequent legislation and shall then be construed as supplemental to and not in derogation of the purposes for which public lands are administered under other provisions of law.
  • 43​ U.S. Code Chapter 37 – PUBLIC RANGELANDS IMPROVEMENT ACT of 1978 (a) The Congress finds and declares that— (c) The policies of this chapter shall become effective only as specific statutory authority for their implementation is enacted by this chapter or by subsequent legislation, and shall be construed as supplemental to and not in derogation of the purposes for which public rangelands are administered under other provisions of law.
  • Mountain States v. Hodel found that the 1971 law is in fact a land-use regulation; “In structure and purpose, the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act is nothing more than a land-use regulation enacted by Congress to ensure the survival of a particular species of wildlife. At the outset, it is important to note that wild horses and burros are no less “wild” animals than are the grizzly bears that roam our national parks and forests.
  • “Herd areas meet the critical habitat criteria set for ACECs. § 1610.7-2 Designation of areas of critical environmental concern or ACEC, is a special designation created by Congress in the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act. That law directed the Secretary of the Interior and the BLM to designate as ACECs: “…areas within the public lands where special management attention is required… to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural and wildlife resources. The horses on our public lands have been determined to be wildlife in many court cases, Kleppe v NM, WHOANM V NMLB and above in Mountain States v. Hodel as well as by Congress in the 1971 Act itself!! Let us remember how many people supported the 1971 Act. Hence these are legally ​wild ​horses.

Many tribes also consider these wild horses as wild, as well as cultural historic properties under both federal and state Historic Preservation Acts.

Just as BLM did not and does not have the authority to micro-manage areas within the Herd Area, it also did not have congressional authority to combine Herd Areas or preserves to create complexes.

The EA speaks to 4 Wilderness Study Areas within the ‘complex’. We realize that as a native species wild horses should be in these WSA’s as an integral part of the public lands and the ecosystems in these WSA’s.

The Secretary must protect herds per the 1971 law. Thriving herds must be genetically viable.This complex is managed for 3 different HMA’s. None of the 3 meet genetic viability at the low end of the AML range. The AML’s need to be adjusted to reflect proper levels to be in compliance with the 1971 law of protecting these herds. ​“It was originally thought that an effective population size of at least 50 was necessary to avoid short-term inbreeding depression, but empirical work suggests that if maintenance of fitness is important, effective population sizes much larger than 50 are necessary. Theoretical studies suggest that the figure could be closer to 5,000 for several reasons….”​ The AML’s must be increased to reflect the base number for genetic viability. In some cases where herds are able to migrate back and forth between HMA’s this is achieved, but again if managed on the entirety of the HA this would happen naturally.

This brings us to the point that migratory routes were not considered in the areas designated in​ the 1971 law. As such many of the herds were cut-off from a natural breeding selection to prevent any inbreeding. This I also an issue with water sources. When the smaller HMA’s were designated within the preserve, horses were often then cut-off from natural water sources. Many times, private landowners were then contracting with BLM to provide water from their own water sources. This is a bit of the fox guarding the hen house. But the entire area or preserved being open to the horse will mitigate, water, forage, land degradation issues.

In the West Douglas Case (COLORADO WILD HORSE AND BURRO COALITION, INC v. Ken​ SALAZAR, DOI pg 8 the Court finds that BLM’s authority to “manage” wild free-roaming horses and burros is expressly made subject to “the provisions of this chapter” 16 U.S.C. § 1333(a), including the provision that “[i]t is the policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture….” Id.§ 1331. It would be anomalous to infer that by authorizing the custodian of the wild free roaming horses and burros to “manage” them, Congress intended to permit the animals’ custodian to subvert the primary policy of the statute by capturing and removing from the wild the very animals that Congress sought to protect from being captured and removed from the wild.

Helicopter stampedes are not what the original intent of the law was. That clearly means the authority given by the Burns Amendment went against the original law to begin with and that amendment needs to be challenged and repealed. In the meantime, helicopters that will cause deaths should not be considered as an option to roundup wild horses. It is not the minimum feasible option nor is it humane. And it also violates the animal cruelty laws of the state of Nevada.

Herd areas relevant to the exemption clause” of the 1976 Federal Land Planning & Management Act. Sec. 302(a) which says; in relevant part, “where a tract of the BLM lands has been dedicated to specific uses according to other provisions of law, it shall be managed in accordance with such laws.” i.e. Such as the intent of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act. 1971 Free Roaming Wild Horse and Burro Act, and the 1973 Endangered species Act.

The EA speaks to degradation by cattle and horses. It is clear that there are many morelivestock in this ‘complex’ area. And with the entirety of the HA or preserve managed principally for the wild horses, as WAS stated in the 1971 law, there would be one horse per 3,962 acres. That is using the low end of the AML range which is what is left on the range after a gather. This is clearly NOT managing the preserve principally for wild horses. We find that to be an egregious error in management. Right now, the number of acres to one horse, according to the total number of horses on the complex according to the EA, is 1 horse per 856 acres.

The EA also states the WFRHBA Act “mandates management of wild horses in a manner that isdesigned to achieve and maintain a thriving ecological balance…” We assert that a thriving ‘natural ecological’ balance cannot be achieved where there is land degradation from excess livestock grazing. Yet the EA does not provide the number of livestock on the preserve. So therefore, with the number of allotments, and the average number of cows permitted on these allotments, we assert that there is no principle management for wild horses, and the number of livestock permitted deviate from the mandate to have a natural ecological balance.

You also infer that there is a need “to prevent the unnecessary death of wild horses resultingfrom excess, which has not been proven in this EA, lack of water or forage, which would not be an issue if livestock were removed, fences were not keeping horses from natural water sources, and again the area is properly managed, principally for wild horses. If there is not enough water or forage, the livestock must be removed first not only for the wild horses but for all other wildlife in the area as well.

In section 1.4 of the EA we disagree that the No Action Alternative is contrary to the​ requirement under the WFRHBA to remove excess horses, because as stated above, the HA is not managed principally for horses, there is an unequal balance of protection for wild horses and burros that is a problem on all of the wild horse preserves and the BLM must stop favoring special interest corporations that want to use these public lands. We see that because wild horses do not make money they always take a back seat, and that is not in keeping with the intent of the law which was to protect the wild horses because in 1971 there were shockingly few left. BLM mistakenly seeks to manage for just above the population there was in 1971 when Congress was so shocked at the few horses left in the wild that the WFRHBA was passed unanimously. And the fact that there were at one time between 2 and 8 million horses here is never mentioned.

We have provided the House and Senate proof of the lies that we have tens of thousands of starving horses on the range, and not one BLM office, person or even politician supporting that claim have ever provided proof beyond the Cold Creek, human created incident, or an occasional horse that dies. These are wild animals and as such, some will die. The law of nature is that only the strong will survive, so managing for unnatural goals in years of drought could even be questionable, however because the predators have been killed in such mass numbers we believe that ‘some’ unnatural measures now must be in place. However, the foundation needs to be fixed to do that. “Blaming wild horses for the damage done on public lands by livestock, is like blaming people who put ice cubes in their drink for the disappearance of the glaciers.” – Erik Molvar, Executive Director, Western Watersheds Project

We want you to choose the No Action Alternative. Give the entire HA’s principle use for wild horses by adjusting the permitted livestock, even if that means waiting until the next RMP round. The WFRHBA gives the Secretary (and his appointed custodians) the authority to provide supplemental feed and water when needed, so that is the minimum feasible level of management. When livestock are in trouble, the government provides subsidies or assistance to make hay drops.

It is a violation of the Nevada Animal Cruelty laws to even consider spaying of mares, and thatoption will never be acceptable to the American people. When the mortality rate of stallions gelded is higher than average when done by the BLM there is no way spaying of a mare, a much more complicated surgery, should not even be considered.

The EA also stated that wild horses double in size every 4 to 5 years but your own census of these HMA’s does not support those claims. We agree with using fertility control, PZP for the herds, but we also recognize that statements have been made by the agency that PZP doesn’t work (it won’t work if you do not use it on enough mares to achieve the desired population growth reduction) it is too expensive, PZP native is about $27 per mare, and the horses can be bait trapped one family at a time. Doing this will reduce the recompensatory breeding, fighting of stallions, and trauma of breaking up family bands.

Again, you mention sterilization of mares in this via ovariectomy. We find this is violating the Nevada Animal Cruelty statutes. Ovariectomies in wild mares has been highly unsuccessful and resulted in mortality rates that were above the acceptable range of the American Veterinary Medical Association. When we researched this last year during the IBLA appeal on the BLM’s decision to do these types of experiments we found that doing them in non-sterile environments is also not pursuant to the laws. And this action could also cause a veterinarian to have their license revoked.

The EA is also not clear, in Alternatives A and B about whether the horses would be treated with fertility control vaccines, or if there would be geldings or if there would be mares spayed, and needs to outline the number of each of those actions in each HMA. The language pertaining to the specific actions to be taken is vague. Therefore, Alternative C must be chosen and no action must be taken for this and all reasons above.

Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment on this plan and provide some insight into what we believe is the best management that can be implemented moving forward to achieve the goal of healthy horses on healthy lands.

Respectfully submitted (as amended) this 12th day of July, 2017
Theresa J Barbour for Citizens Against Equine Slaughter
PO Box 115
Drain, Oregon 97435

Patience O’Dowd or Wild Horse Observers Association
PO Box 932
Placitas, NM 87043

Wednesday, July 12th: The Fate of Horses in this Country Will be Decided Today (Updated)


Update 1:

The Amendment in the Ag. budget failed, and Amodei intentionally mislead the committee….more on this son. We’re listening to the Interior hearing which addresses wild horses before we put out a full account of today’s administration’s results……sickening thus far.

Update 2:
The Interior budget passed the House subcommittee and now moves n the the Senate full committee. This is sickening news again. Not a good day for the EPA, ESA or horses in America. Today, once again I will turn my flag upside down to represent a nation in distress, and it will remain there I fear, until this administration is voted out of office! WE have to vote these people out in 2018. This is OUR country, OUR environment, OUR animals, and WE WILL BE HEARD!

Will they go to slaughter in this country once again?

Will the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) get Congressional approval to destroy 50,000 wild horses that they removed from the lands they belonged on?

Will the protections from all of our equines in this country go backward in time, to a less humane, less civilized place?


At 10:30 EST, the Full Committee mark-up on the Department of Agriculture’s FY 2018 budget hearing will look at the House Draft, that draft removed section 767, and that meant that there can be funding for USDA inspections of horse meat in this country. And removing section 767 also removed the restriction that did not allow BLM to euthanize or slaughter healthy or unadoptable horses.We believe the Roybal-Allard/Dent amendment will be introduced to address at least one of these issues, but we have not yet seen the language, so we will be waiting to hear that. And whether or not it is voted into inclusion in the budget. (This hearing I believe will be audio only) You can open it on the web at the following link:

At 3 pm EST, the House mark-up of the Department of the Interior’s FY 2018 budget will begin. This bill addresses the request of Secretary Zinke, Rep. Chris Stewart and others to make sure NO restrictions are included that stop the BLM from using ALL tools available to them in the 1971 Wild Free Roaming Horses & Burros Act. This tool they speak of includes the possibility of destroying or disposing of excess horses. The bill seeks to make it easier and faster for the horses to be transferred to other agencies, under the guise of work horses, with no limits. The original language in the 1971 law also said sterilization could be a tool used to manage horse populations. Now, we know in 1971 that statement meant gelding a stallion (mare sterilization had never been done at that point) and they still intend to try and twist that to experiment on mares, and do it in filthy, dusty environments, putting the mares at great risk of death. We will be watching and hoping that the bill is simply at a stand still for this reason and MANY others. It seeks to destroy wild lands, wildlife, and so much more to make us ‘energy dominant’ as both Secretary Zinke and President Trump have stated. You can watch this hearing at this link: