WYOMING — A coalition of wild horse advocates, environmentalists and academics have filed a lawsuit against the federal government for its plan that would result in the largest-ever eradication of federally protected wild horses and the elimination of 43% of designated wild horse habitat in the Red Desert area of Wyoming.
The plaintiffs, the American Wild Horse Campaign (AWHC), Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), Western Watersheds Project, author and Casper College instructor Dr. Chad Hanson and wildlife photographers Kimerlee Curyl and Carol Walker allege that the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) plan to decimate some of the state’s “most popular and iconic”wild horse herds violates federal law.
“The decision threatens to undermine federal protections for wild horses across the West by setting a dangerous precedent for private landowners to dictate whether federally protected wild horses will be allowed to live in their designated habitats on public lands,” said William S. Eubanks II of Eubanks and Associates, which filed the protest on behalf of the groups. Eubanks notes that the plan violates the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, the Administrative Procedure Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
Before the BLM’s helicopter roundups of 2020 and 2021, which permanently removed 3,502 wild horses from the Red Desert, the agency determined through its environmental analysis that Red Desert wild horse habitats were already meeting the “thriving natural ecological balance” standard established under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act.
The Record of Decision published on May 9 approves a land use plan amendment that would eliminate 2.1 million acres of wild horse habitat in Wyoming.
“Our lawsuit challenges the BLM’s decision to elevate the private interests of the livestock industry over the public interest in protecting wild horses and the public lands where they live,” said Suzanne Roy, executive director for the AWHC.
Conservationists proposed a number of alternatives that would improve ecological conditions, including reducing livestock numbers, reintroducing wild bison and resolving “checkerboard” public land patterns through land swaps or, if necessary, eminent domain.
They added that “checkerboard” land ownership patterns, where public lands are interspersed with private parcels like the ones the Rock Springs Grazing Association owns in the Red Desert, have also been causing public access issues elsewhere.
The groups ultimately argue that the agency failed to give any of these reasonable alternatives the detailed consideration they should be offered under the law.
