Wild West Discussion – February 2010

Wild horses are viewed by some people as living symbols of the Wild West and by others as nuisances, as the mustangs compete with livestock on the open range. What do you think of the Bureau of Land Management policy of keeping a set number of mustangs in the wild, while placing the remainder in holding pens and putting them up for adoption?

4 Responses

  1. len

    A reading of Howard Zinn’s “people’s history of United States” re-enforces this idea, If all people are thinking the same, there is NO thinking. greg michno is a member of a culture that seems unable or unwilling to go beyond what mommy an daddy told him and cannot relate to any other people save those who “think” the same as he does.

  2. Steve McCarty

    I live in Oregon. From here they send out animal lovers to round up the mustangs. They get several hundred a season. Most are in pretty poor condition, but they do hold auctions. The animals usually sell for $150 or so.

    People who love animals buy them and put them in their back yard, thinging they will become pets, like the family mutt. Not so. Horses to be properly cared for are expensive to maintain. One owner ordered an employee to take out out back and shoot it. So the young fellow did, using his 9mm pistol. After the horse came to, it wandered off and was discovered starving and blind in one eye. The found the owner and tried the shooter. Animal cruelty. He was sentence to five years in prison, as I recall.

    Other people just turn the horses out, and being alone, they starve. Some just keep them in the pen and starve them to death.

    Morale of the story? They were probably better off on the open range. They don’t really compete for forage. You seen them in the desert where there are no cattle. There are also donkey’s out there. Some of the horses are Kiger Mustangs which are a unique breed of wild Oregon horses. They IMO should be left out there, as they have been for 500 years. They are some of the purest Spanish stock brought over here by the Conquistadores extant.

    Left on their own hook the wild horses survive for a few years and starve. Brought in they live for two or three years and then starve. What’s the diff?

  3. Fran Cook

    I think that nature and God was intended to guide, protect and care for the wild and always has. What is the big deal of letting nature do what nature does best. After all, we are NOT the smartest race ever. Look at the extinct species you can tell that. We are guilty of killing off the buffalo by the hundreds for about $1 a hide and the tounge…think on that one for a moment. If we had to do that to insure that we did not starve, which most people won’t if they are industruious enough to plant, save and preserve, then it wouldn’t be such a crime. Now I view it a crime to go out into some pretty unpopulated places to chase out the remaining wild herds of mustangs and burros. Quit.

  4. Steve McCarty

    Buffalo hides sold for between $3 and $5 for good ones. It was a very poor hide that sold for a buck. Hunting buff was big money in those days. The hunters did not shoot more than they could skin. Wyatt Earp hunted alone, doing the skinning himself and made $2800 one year. He would kill about six a day. Large buffalo hunting companies might kill and process as many as 70. The southern herds were gone by 1872 and the northern by 1886. Indians also hunted buffalo for their tongues, hides etc. While they did have a use for all of the animal they only used what they needed at the time.

    Several species of bison were driven extinct. The buffalo is doing fine now. It still thrives on the plains, it does carry diseases that harm cattle, a fact that riles ranchers.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.