The BLM’s balancing act between protecting range conditions and feral horse populations can be precarious in the best times. When fire is thrown into the mix, the difficult, nuanced issue can get even less clear.
This muddled situation was reflected in a recent case decision. In his Aug. 9 ruling, Oregon District Court Judge Michael Simon gave a mixed opinion in the case of the BLM’s emergency round-up of 155 horses from the Three Fingers Herd Management Area (HMA) in Oregon following the 2016 Cherry Road Fire.
On the one hand, Simon agreed with the plaintiff group Friends of Animals that the BLM’s emergency gather violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the horses came almost entirely from one of the HMA’s pastures and the BLM did not fully consider the impacts. On the other hand, he agreed with the defendant BLM that returning the gathered horses to the HMA would likely cause more harm than good, both because of the need to rest the area following the fire and because returning them would exceed the HMA’s appropriate management levels.
Ultimately, Simon remanded the decision back to the BLM without vacating it. This means the BLM will have to reconsider the decision to bring it in line with NEPA, but the gathered horses need not be returned to the HMA.
Fire and feral horses
The Cherry Road Fire broke out in late August 2016 within the Three Fingers HMA. It ultimately burned more than 35,000 acres and cost the state more than $3 million.
Following the fire and its containment, the BLM estimated there were 202 adult horses and 77 foals on the HMA. The HMA’s appropriate management level is between 75-150 horses. The emergency gather of 155 animals would have left the remaining population at between 80-120 horses; within the HMA’s appropriate management level.
Friends of Animals argued that the BLM’s emergency gather violated NEPA requirements. The group argued the horses gathered were almost entirely from one pasture within the HMA and the BLM did not first determine what environmental impact that might have. Simon agreed on this point.
However, Simon’s decision not to vacate the BLM’s emergency gather was based on something familiar to western ranchers; pastures must rest after a fire for the good of the range. He found that the evidence of the case suggests that returning gathered horses to the HMA “could negatively affect the range’s future ability to provide a viable habitat for wild horses.”
The BLM’s plans for the HMA pasture affected by the fire is for several seasons of rest from both horse and permitted cattle grazing. During this time, applications of herbicide to control invasive grass species and the seeding of native grass species has occurred. The affected pasture is slated to reopen to grazing in March 2019, but it is still being monitored.
“Although [Friends of Animals] presents evidence that there is available forage in the HMA, it does not dispute the BLM’s characterization of the fire recovery plans, or the need to prevent grazing on the forage that is available during fire recovery efforts,” Simon wrote.
“[Friends of Animals], in fact, does not appear wholly to dispute the claim that it would be unwise to return the removed horses to the HMA at this time.” — WLJ
