# Wild Horse Capture



## FireFlies (Jul 26, 2009)

Hey there everyone! 

So this November I will be saying a speech about wild horses at the 4-H nationals in Kentucky. I am in the process of rewriting and am having a whole load of trouble writing my conclusion. In the beginning of the speech I try to give both sides of the wild horse story--I call them pro-capture and pro-freedom--which is basically the information the BLM--Bureau Of Land Management-- gives about what they do with the wild horses and then the accusations pro-freedom activists have against the pro-capture--I used statements from The Cloud Foundation, Humanity Through Education, etc..--. Originally, in my conclusion I was pro-capture. Agreeing with the protocols in the new handbook of using fertility drugs. Though now, I have come to the conclusion that I don't really agree with either side anymore :?. In my research I have found that the BLM are lacking transparency and the pro-freedom activists do not present evidence in *some* of their accusations and personify the horse. These faults lead me to not trusting either side. 

So... give me your opinion! 

I want your opinion on the best way to maintain ecological balance while having the wild horses stay on the range. To keep overpopulation and underpopulation from happening and deal with the wild horses in holding pens. Also you may tell me about anything else in this topic you think needs addressing. 

I'm hoping that by going to the people and getting their opinion that I will have a better understanding of things and able to figure out my conclusion. 

However, this is a POLITE debate thread. I don't want people calling each other names or saying that their opinion is stupid, etc... the point of this is that no matter which side you are on we are figuring out a way *together* to keep the wild horses healthy and in their habitat. 

And also to help me write my conclusion :wink:


----------



## AlexS (Aug 9, 2010)

Great topic, and I am interested in the thoughts posted. 

My own opinion is back and forth, it is a nice idea to have wild horses but I don't like the idea of them breeding beyond manageable. But I don't like holding pens either, and with all the horses out there how many of us are going to take a truely wild horse?

It would be a dream world to think that there is enough people out there to fund a gelding system for enough of the horses. So who knows what the answer is? But I am interested to hear thoughts.


----------



## Eolith (Sep 30, 2007)

Kudos for doing some research into both sides of the debate! I was dreading that this would be one of the threads in which the OP puts down a be all end all statement about the BLM management being all right or all wrong.

Honestly, I don't think there's a nice neat and pretty answer. It's all very complicated... no one can afford to go all one way or all the other. I do tend to lean towards support of BLM (pro-capture). I know that in Oregon at least, the BLM program is working very hard not only to maintain ideal populations of wild horses but also to promote genetic diversity and desirable traits in the horses. They intentionally choose which amazing studs to leave out on the range to result in flashier and typically more conformationally desirable mustangs... and boy do they come out with some lookers.

For example:


----------



## littrella (Aug 28, 2010)

both sides have good points, my opnion.... less leasing out of federal grazing lands, so more mustangs can be left out in the wild. Capturing some is nessary, but they need to have a better plan on how to handel them after capture. I've seen some pretty skinny horses come out of elm creek


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

I really get tired of the same old 'save the pwetty horsies' arguments from people who have absolutely NO CLUE how things work. 

Horses are a_ nonnative_ species to North America, which means the feral horses are over grazing and destroying vegetation while the native species_ starve_.

As far as the 'stop the land leasing' argument, that's completely bogus. The cattle ranchers are only allowed to lease that land a few months out of the year, and they're strictly watched and regulated. The land leases are rotated, so no area is allowed to be over grazed by the cattle.

That money the ranchers pay to lease the land helps fund the BLM. So if the leases are canceled, who is going to pick up the slack? The taxpayers? Yeah, just what I want, to be taxed MORE.

Feral horses are a blight on the area. The BLM is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. What_ I_ think should be done with most of those scrubby, mutt horses is euthanasia or sale to slaughter.

Adopt out the ones who aren't crazy, fugly, and ill conformed, keep a minimal amount of them out on the range to satisfy the people who seem to think feral horses are some sort of American 'symbol', and get rid of the rest.

They'd be great as slaughter horses, since they're untouched by the chemicals we give our domesticated horses. The money the BLM could make on selling them to KBs would help pay to keep the small, managed herds out on the range.

The Cloud Foundation is hardly an unbiased source of research. If you want to do _real_ research, I suggest staying away from the fanatics on both sides of the issue.

And now I'm done with this thread; y'all go ahead and have your hysterical trainwreck.


----------



## Eolith (Sep 30, 2007)

Speed Racer said:


> Feral horses are a blight on the area. The BLM is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. What_ I_ think should be done with most of those scrubby, mutt horses is euthanasia or sale to slaughter.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


 :lol:  :lol:

I actually laughed. I can see you have a strong viewpoint on this matter. I'm sorry you believe this thread will become a trainwreck. If it does, I daresay it will be mostly in retaliation to what you've said. Congrats for setting us on that course.

Of course, you've got several valid points. I think some of the slaughter comments went a little over the top however. A little hypocritical considering your scorn for the Cloud Foundation and other extremists.


----------



## FireFlies (Jul 26, 2009)

Speed Racer said:


> Horses are a_ nonnative_ species to North America, which means the feral horses are over grazing and destroying vegetation while the native species_ starve_.


I actually mention this fact in the pro-capture part of my speech and agree that if we leave the wild horses unchecked they will overbalance the circle of things and harm the native species. In Missouri--where I live--we're having a horrible time with Zebra Mussels and this nonnative frog--whose name I have forgotten--. Both species have no predators and as a symptom are over breeding and killing off the native species of other mussels and frogs. The difference between these species and the wild horse is that people have no problem killing off the mussels or frogs but if you mention open season on horses chances are you're going to have a big hissy fit :?. Which is, how it should be. Although they are very different animals, I would compare hunting horses the same as going out on the streets and shooting all the stray dogs and cats you come across. 



> What_ I_ think should be done with most of those scrubby, mutt horses is euthanasia or sale to slaughter.


Again, I agree with part of your statement. Some of the horses the BLM captures will have to be humanely put down just like what happens with the over population of stray dogs and cat at shelters. *I know I keep comparing horses to dogs and cats but it's the best I could come up with right now*. It is kind of ironic but last years speech was on horse slaughter. I was against horse slaughter. This was because I didn't agree on how to was preformed in the U.S and other foreign plants. If they reopened the plants now but regularized them I believe the whole process would benefit. So as of now, I wouldn't want any horse--wild or domestic--going to slaughter. Also, wild horses are descendants of Iberian horses which include the Portuguese he Lusitano, Sorraia and Garrano breeds and fourteen other Spanish breeds. If you look most horse breed books you will find "Mustang" listed as a breed. 



> As far as the 'stop the land leasing' argument, that's completely bogus. The cattle ranchers are only allowed to lease that land a few months out of the year, and they're strictly watched and regulated. The land leases are rotated, so no area is allowed to be over grazed by the cattle.


This I completely agree with. In fact, I thank you for saying this because I had a hard time finding information on this. 



> That money the ranchers pay to lease the land helps fund the BLM. So if the leases are canceled, who is going to pick up the slack? The taxpayers? Yeah, just what I want, to be taxed MORE.


I don't pay taxes yet but my parents do so again, I agree. 



> Feral horses are a blight on the area. The BLM is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't.


EXACTLY! The BLM almost seems afraid to me to do anything out in the open in fear of the public's opinion. 



> Adopt out the ones who aren't crazy, fugly, and ill conformed, keep a minimal amount of them out on the range to satisfy the people who seem to think feral horses are some sort of American 'symbol', and get rid of the rest.


As a previous poster pointed out, the feral horses are being selectively breed to keep bad conformation from happening. I think the picture that person posted is evidence enough that Mustangs are not "fugly". Yes, the feral horses taken off the range are wild but with correct training they can be tamed. Just a quick question, what do you think is the American symbol? Horses were a big part of the history of our nation, imagine if they had never been there? Even if you don't see them as an American symbol, what about a rare species? The eagle--which is America's symbol--is a protected species. Even though they are over populated mustangs are a breed of horse that are worth preserving. What is the quarter horse or Morgans where completely wiped out. 




> The Cloud Foundation is hardly an unbiased source of research. If you want to do _real_ research, I suggest staying away from the fanatics on both sides of the issue


. I chose the cloud foundation *because* they were biased. I needed a one sided organization for the pro-freedom part of my speech and as you so pointed out, they are. 



> And now I'm done with this thread; y'all go ahead and have your hysterical trainwreck.


 I am loading passengers into the Hysteric Train as I type. We should be ready for complete mental breakdown by tomorrow. 


Seriously though, I appreciate everyones reply! I am in the midst of writing my conclusion and hopefully will have it done tonight. Should I post it once I am finished for everyone to read? I wanted to reply to everyone's posts but since I am running out of time I had to pick and choose. Sorry. 

Keep on posting!
FireFlies


----------



## sinsin4635 (Dec 1, 2009)

Speed Racer said:


> I really get tired of the same old 'save the pwetty horsies' arguments from people who have absolutely NO CLUE how things work.
> 
> Horses are a_ nonnative_ species to North America, which means the feral horses are over grazing and destroying vegetation while the native species_ starve_.
> 
> ...


**** girl!! And just what is wrong with "mutt" horses? Some "mutt horses" make some of the best horses out there! If i were stranded in the mountains or in the desert or anywhere for that matter, i would way rather be on my mustang than any domesticated horse. Just like mutt dogs are some of the best dogs out there. Theres good & bad ones in every breed, so does that mean you would take the ugly ones of whatever it is you ride & ship them to slaughter? You would prolly change your tune if you knew what awesome horses they are.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

We mentioned it on one of the slaughter threads and SR made me think of it...just throwing it out there and I dont even know if its plausable because of land (tax?) requirements...

But we've talked about breeding for slaughter. Why not do that with the culls of mustangs and then breed for hardier ones like smrobs posted?

As far as my actual opinion of what should be done. Im not sure. Theres no clean and clear answer for me though I do like the idea of thinning the population but keeping around well bred sturdy examples of the breed.


Im tired and I'm rambling. Im sorry.


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

sinsin4635 said:


> **** girl!! And just what is wrong with "mutt" horses? Some "mutt horses" make some of the best horses out there! If i were stranded in the mountains or in the desert or anywhere for that matter, i would way rather be on my mustang than any domesticated horse. Just like mutt dogs are some of the best dogs out there. Theres good & bad ones in every breed, so does that mean you would take the ugly ones of whatever it is you ride & ship them to slaughter? You would prolly change your tune if you knew what awesome horses they are.


sinsin, I think you missed the point SR was trying to make. Noone says "mutt" can't be a great horse. I know number of grade horses with nice confo and great mind. I've seen some very nice mustangs trained very well. However BLM facilities are full with mustangs, some with very bad confo, some totally crazy. Reality is not too many people want them - partially because you have to put lots of training (making them rather expensive in the end), partially because they are not good for certain disciplines (not all, but many). Letting them just sit and breed is NOT an answer. And what can happen to those noone is interested in? I bet meat plant.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

Ignore this post. I have no idea why it is here.


----------



## sinsin4635 (Dec 1, 2009)

kitten_Val said:


> sinsin, I think you missed the point SR was trying to make. Noone says "mutt" can't be a great horse. I know number of grade horses with nice confo and great mind. I've seen some very nice mustangs trained very well. However BLM facilities are full with mustangs, some with very bad confo, some totally crazy. Reality is not too many people want them - partially because you have to put lots of training (making them rather expensive in the end), partially because they are not good for certain disciplines (not all, but many). Letting them just sit and breed is NOT an answer. And what can happen to those noone is interested in? I bet meat plant.


 I totally agree that letting them sit & breed is not the answer, but niether is sending them to slaugher! And i just have to disagree about it costing a bunch of money to get your mustang trained. You don't have to be a "profesional trainer" or send your horse to a trainer to get trained if you have some horse knowledge & some common sense. My boy cost me 200.00 to adopt & i trained him myself. Oh i'm sorry, i forgot the most important thing, you have to have patience!, but if you don't have those three things than you have no business getting a mustang in the first place.


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

Spastic_Dove said:


> But we've talked about breeding for slaughter. Why not do that with the culls of mustangs and then breed for hardier ones like smrobs posted?


Awesome, I'm getting credit for things that I didn't do :lol::wink:.

I personally love mustangs but the idea of "leave them all free to live out their lives the way God intended" is a joke. I agree with SR on most of the points though I really wouldn't like to see all of them wiped out. I have no practical reason other than the girlish dream of seeing all the wild horses running the prarie. Silly, I know, but I can't help it. :roll:

They need to cull down to manageable numbers (either by adoption or slaughter; no I am not against slaughtering them). Leave only the best stock as studs and breeding mares on the prarie. Keep the youngsters gathered and culled every couple of years. With the proper training (and not everyone is capable of dealing with 'stangs, even some pro trainers), they can become very productive little horses. They have good sturdy little bodies with good bones and feet. Though they do kinda fit in the "jack of all trades master of none" category.


----------



## The Rocking U (Sep 16, 2010)

Out here, the wild horse refuge land really isn't as vast as it should be for a refuge. As a result, every year they sell off a certain percentage of the herd. They actually select the ones to be auctioned off. It's not just a random thing. Now, if a person is REALLY adamant about having a large herd of wild horses, I would just ask where THEY are going to get the money to put THEIR herd! As far as being an invasive pest, so are humans and we do far greater damage to everything and anything we can, kind of like cancer. Which should go first? A wild horse or burro can be purchased out here in March and start at $125.00. I personally endorse adopting a wild horse(or burro) and support spade and neutering of humans!:twisted:


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

sinsin4635 said:


> I totally agree that letting them sit & breed is not the answer, but niether is sending them to slaugher! And i just have to disagree about it costing a bunch of money to get your mustang trained. *You don't have to be a "profesional trainer" or send your horse to a trainer to get trained if you have some horse knowledge & some common sense. *My boy cost me 200.00 to adopt & i trained him myself. Oh i'm sorry, i forgot the most important thing, you have to have patience!, but if you don't have those three things than you have no business getting a mustang in the first place.


Too many people can NOT train themself. The fact you could train doesn't mean everyone else can. :wink: My former BO got 4(!) mustangs out of greediness (because they were cheap, 2 even came as 2 for $25). She couldn't train them even though she had years of experience with horses. Ended up ruining 2 (so they were very dangerous to ride), 1 eventually was sent to the trainer, because he kept sending her to ER, and not sure what happened with the last one as I left by that time. I know some other people in same boat - experience they had was not enough to deal with the wild horse. Also if you want to do say jumping or dressage or reining you HAVE to get a trainer, who knows what he/she is doing (unless you are VERY experienced in certain discipline).


----------



## Eolith (Sep 30, 2007)

Yes, it is incorrect to say that just anyone can train any horse. The horses vary greatly, as do people. For example, a mustang trainer that I know who actively trains mustangs for readoption has had mustangs that she could throw a saddle onto and ride within three months... and she's had mustangs with whom she was still working on the basic basics of trust after six months. One of the mares that she is working with had a very nasty and dangerous habit of striking out at her family. She was literally considering euthanasia for this mare, and she's trained 15-20 mustangs for herself and others.

Not to mention, even with the best of intentions some of us just don't have or haven't yet developed the acute "horse sense" often needed to read the body language and behavior of horses.


----------



## littrella (Aug 28, 2010)

the rocking u said:


> as far as being an invasive pest, so are humans and we do far greater damage to everything and anything we can, kind of like cancer. Which should go first?
> 
> I personally endorse adopting a wild horse(or burro) and support spade and neutering of humans!:twisted:


 
****!!! Love it!!!


----------



## Eolith (Sep 30, 2007)

Perhaps we are an invasive pest, but humans are also the indirect cause of wild mustangs being present at all. Perhaps we should take responsibility for our screw up and remove them entirely.

Not to mention, we as humans typically have the means to cope with the environmental conditions we place ourselves in. The mustangs if left to themselves would experience a population boom and then a bust... likely dragging along native wildlife with them.


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

The Rocking U said:


> I personally endorse adopting a wild horse(or burro) and support spade and neutering of humans!:twisted:


I definitely support _spaying_ and neutering of humans, especially those who didn't pass fifth grade spelling. The human gene pool could certainly use some chlorine.

I don't want any feral horses or burros. Y'all who have bought into the whole romantic myth of the 'wild' horses can do that. I'd rather know my animals' pedigrees and what to expect from them. If I'm going to gamble, I want the deck at least stacked as much in my favor as possible.


----------



## sinsin4635 (Dec 1, 2009)

I never said that anyone can train a mustang. What i did say was that you need some horse knowledge, common sense & patience. Without that you have no business getting one.Mustangs are definatly not for everyone.


----------



## sinsin4635 (Dec 1, 2009)

Speed Racer said:


> I definitely support _spaying_ and neutering of humans, especially those who didn't pass fifth grade spelling. The human gene pool could certainly use some chlorine.
> 
> I don't want any feral horses or burros. Y'all who have bought into the whole romantic myth of the 'wild' horses can do that. I'd rather know my animals' pedigrees and what to expect from them. If I'm going to gamble, I want the deck at least stacked as much in my favor as possible.


 You can't know how a horse is going to be just by his papers. You might have an idea, but it's not a guarantee. Besides that, not everybody has the money to go out & purchase a well papered horse. But i'll tell you what, i would'nt trade my mutt boy for any well bred, papered horse! And with a mustang, if you can handle the gentling process, you can expect a sturdy, healthy, hardy, awesome friend for life.


----------



## GuitarChump (Sep 8, 2010)

I was just at the BLM and know for a fact the the horses go to 3 auctions. If no one adopts them, the can be sold to anyone (aka the meat packers). They are wild horses, they BELONG in the wild. They are part of America. They're a major part of history.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

But then what is your suggestion for how to manage their numbers and the lack of space?


----------



## GuitarChump (Sep 8, 2010)

I think we should take in the stallions geld them and release them. Keep some stallions out there with good conformation and obviously auction some. But not reduce the numbers to under 2000.


----------



## MacabreMikolaj (May 9, 2009)

Y'know, sometimes the arguments I hear FOR the wild horses makes me think those are the people that detest them most.

I'm not quite sure what is glamorous about starvation and bullet holes, but these so-called "wild" horses are quickly running out of wild to roam, and the number one cause of death is either starvation or irate ranchers getting sick of competing for grass for their cattle.

We have enough idiotic irresponsible backyard breeding to begin with, without needing even more yahoo's thinking hauling home a wild Mustang is a good idea.


----------



## Eolith (Sep 30, 2007)

Gelding the majority of the male horses is not a viable option. It wouldn't actually help with population control that much. I'll try to explain why in a brief manner.

Say that half of the studs were gelded and turned back out. That would be well and dandy, but there would still be the same number of mares out and breedable. So even if the gelded half of the studs can't impregnate the mares, the other ungelded half can "pick up the slack" and breed the mares.

The end result: you have the same number of overall foals, but less genetic diversity. Thus, it wouldn't help with population control and it would actually be detrimental to the genetic health of the horses.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

GuitarChump said:


> I was just at the BLM and know for a fact the the horses go to 3 auctions. If no one adopts them, the can be sold to anyone (aka the meat packers). They are wild horses, they BELONG in the wild. They are part of America. They're a major part of history.


They are no more wild than a stray dog is a wolf. They are not a major part of history. There were NO "wild" horses before about 1940. All horses had an owner and most were brought in at some time in the year to be used in farming or ranching then turned out again when the work was done. With the mechanization of agriculture came less demand for horses so they were being sold for meat. The beef packer didn't like that and with the help of a nevada hysteric named Wild Horse Annie got the Free Roaming Wild Horse and Burro act passed. They wanted the Fish and Wildlife to be in charge of them but since they are feral non-native animals the buck was handed to the BLM. 

Mustangs would look very different today if the herds were managed with an eye to making them self-sustaining. Very few ranchers that begrudge the horses the feed they need but the BLM has no idea how many horses they have on the range and they only half-*** try to count and manage them resulting in over-population and starvation and death. The areas in the west that have mustangs are very fragile ecosystems and if they are not managed properly it can cause damage that takes years to repair. Cattle are watched very closely and rotated with this fact in mind however the mustangs are allowed to run wherever they want and cause alot of damage at times.


----------



## sinsin4635 (Dec 1, 2009)

MacabreMikolaj said:


> Y'know, sometimes the arguments I hear FOR the wild horses makes me think those are the people that detest them most.
> 
> I'm not quite sure what is glamorous about starvation and bullet holes, but these so-called "wild" horses are quickly running out of wild to roam, and the number one cause of death is either starvation or irate ranchers getting sick of competing for grass for their cattle.
> 
> We have enough idiotic irresponsible backyard breeding to begin with, without needing even more yahoo's thinking hauling home a wild Mustang is a good idea.


 I totally agree with this. Thats why i keep saying, 1. you need horse knowledge. 2. you need common sense. 3. And most importantly, you need PATIENCE! Otherwise you really have no business getting a mustang. To many "yahoos" get one home & think they can ride them next week! Thats not gonna happen. I had my boy for over a year, & could do anything on the ground with him before i got on him. Alot of "yahoos" don't have the patience for that. But in my case at least, "hauling home a wild mustang" was the best idea i ever had!


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

Well I read were they're putting cougars where wild horses are to keep the population low, but that means some horse will die from the cougars, but heck to me that beats going to slaughter. Horse killed on the spot by cougar compared to horse transported for possibly days without food or water and wait their turn in line at slaughter smelling blood and terrified every step of the way. I'd pick cougar death over slaughter any day.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Katesrider011 said:


> Well I read were they're putting cougars where wild horses are to keep the population low, but that means some horse will die from the cougars, but heck to me that beats going to slaughter. Horse killed on the spot by cougar compared to horse transported for possibly days without food or water and wait their turn in line at slaughter smelling blood and terrified every step of the way. I'd pick cougar death over slaughter any day.


First it's not true and second I have seen a horse that was attacked by a cougar and it was not pretty and had the horse not gotten away it would have died very painfully. Horses that go to slaughter are not hauled for days and days without food or water. If it wasn't for irrational bleeding hearts they wouldn't have to be hauled so far anyway as there would be far more processing facilities here in the U.S.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Eolith said:


> Gelding the majority of the male horses is not a viable option. It wouldn't actually help with population control that much. I'll try to explain why in a brief manner.
> 
> Say that half of the studs were gelded and turned back out. That would be well and dandy, but there would still be the same number of mares out and breedable. So even if the gelded half of the studs can't impregnate the mares, the other ungelded half can "pick up the slack" and breed the mares.
> 
> The end result: you have the same number of overall foals, but less genetic diversity. Thus, it wouldn't help with population control and it would actually be detrimental to the genetic health of the horses.


^ This (well said) and it is not all the stallions that breed now. There are bands of bachelor stallions that do not breed any mares. Herd leaders do all the breeding. It is not one stallion per mare and if we cut down the stallions there will be mares standing around not being bred.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

kevinshorses said:


> First it's not true and second I have seen a horse that was attacked by a cougar and it was not pretty and had the horse not gotten away it would have died very painfully. Horses that go to slaughter are not hauled for days and days without food or water. If it wasn't for irrational bleeding hearts they wouldn't have to be hauled so far anyway as there would be far more processing facilities here in the U.S.


Yeah I guess I could agree with you there, but I couldn't handle having a slaughter facility close to where I live if they were even ever brought back to the usa and to my state. But I guess it would be an option for people who can't afford to euthanize. But I'd be worried someone would steal my horse to make some quick cash. But that's probably my paranoid side of me as well. But I could report her stolen and the slaughterhouses wouldn't kill her if they knew she was stolen, right???


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Yes the processing plants kept a pretty close eye out for stolen animals. Besides, the price would have to go up alot to make horse theft worth the risk.


----------



## Mocha26 (Oct 27, 2010)

I don't think any horse deserves to be slaughtered. & mustangs aren't "fugly." theyre a lot better than any domesticated horse. They're extremely sure footed & strong. A breed worth keeping around for sure. I dont think any breed should be just wipped out. I would love to adopt one, as would many people.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

Mocha26 said:


> I don't think any horse deserves to be slaughtered. & mustangs aren't "fugly." theyre a lot better than any domesticated horse. They're extremely sure footed & strong. A breed worth keeping around for sure. I dont think any breed should be just wipped out. I would love to adopt one, as would many people.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


No one is totally wipping out the mustangs I don't think. They're saying just send some to slaughter and some to adoption. The one's that don't get adopted would make for good use as meat. I far from think mustangs are gonna totally be wipped out. That just seems insane to me to get rid of an entire breed of animal.


----------



## Cowgirl101 (Oct 12, 2010)

I'll like to believe there's a place where horses can run free. Away from slaughter. (I just hate animal abuse.)

But some people just are crazy about it, they can get it right. Mixed breeds in the wild are okay, I think.
If I'm correct I remember reading a book where there are a "mutt" horse and it became a breed not a "mutt". So I don't see a problem there.

Everything needs a chance to live.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

Cowgirl101 said:


> I'll like to believe there's a place where horses can run free. Away from slaughter. (I just hate animal abuse.)
> 
> But some people just are crazy about it, they can get it right. Mixed breeds in the wild are okay, I think.
> If I'm correct I remember reading a book where there are a "mutt" horse and it became a breed not a "mutt". So I don't see a problem there.
> ...


Horse abuse is like people who neglect their horses by not feeding them and such. Slaughter is just like Euthanasia. It's quick and painless. Not abuse.


----------



## Cowgirl101 (Oct 12, 2010)

Katesrider011 said:


> Horse abuse is like people who neglect their horses by not feeding them and such. Slaughter is just like Euthanasia. It's quick and painless. Not abuse.



But still..

Not all slaughter is painless.. I have seen some photo and if someone photoshop it then they are sick. 

I would love to foster horses.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

Cowgirl101 said:


> But still..
> 
> Not all slaughter is painless.. I have seen some photo and if someone photoshop it then they are sick.
> 
> I would love to foster horses.


Well when you can, get a foster horse.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Cowgirl101 said:


> I would love to foster horses.


Perfect. Then you take all your monies so you can afford to foster all the unwanted horses there are, and the problem is solved.

But rationally, we all know that this is not an option. So real solution is required.


----------

