It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feral Horses are an invasive species.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
These horses do not belong in the wild. They're domestic animals, and have no natural predators in this part of the world.

www.fws.gov...


Part A of the undertaking is management by the FWS that results in the presence of feral horses on the Refuge. Feral horses are not indigenous. Their behavior and impacts to the landscape
are generally incompatible with the native ecosystem. The presence and impacts of feral horses on the Refuge are ultimately the responsibility of the FWS. Therefore, it is appropriate that we consider, pursuant to the Section 106 of the NHPA, the effects of feral horses on historic
properties.


I don't understand why people are so heart broken about removing these horses. It's for the good of the environment and the individual horses health.




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Deny ignorance:


Modern horses, zebras, and asses belong to the genus Equus, the only surviving genus in a once diverse family, the Equidae. Based on fossil records, the genus appears to have originated in North America about 4 million years ago and spread to Eurasia (presumably by crossing the Bering land bridge) 2 to 3 million years ago. Following that original emigration, there were additional westward migrations to Asia and return migrations back to North America, as well as several extinctions of Equus species in North America.

The last prehistoric North American horses died out between 13,000 and 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene, but by then Equus had spread to Asia, Europe, and Africa.
Source: www.livescience.com...

Perhaps if one wished to present an opinion under the heading of a Science and Technology forum, one might wish to actually conduct some research... that link was found within 2 minutes using a simple Google search. That doesn't seem much of a task.

Just sayin'......

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Horses in north america have always had a predator. It is mainly the wolf and coyote. In packs they will both take down a horse, cow, or whatever animal happens to be there. Ever wonder why farmers always tried to keep the wolves away from their herds? Not only that when they are young as a colt they are very easy prey for a wolf or coyotes. Mountain lions and cougars will also take down a young colts and full grown horses. So to say there are no predators is just ridiculous.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
These horses do not belong in the wild. They're domestic animals, and have no natural predators in this part of the world.

www.fws.gov...


Part A of the undertaking is management by the FWS that results in the presence of feral horses on the Refuge. Feral horses are not indigenous. Their behavior and impacts to the landscape
are generally incompatible with the native ecosystem. The presence and impacts of feral horses on the Refuge are ultimately the responsibility of the FWS. Therefore, it is appropriate that we consider, pursuant to the Section 106 of the NHPA, the effects of feral horses on historic
properties.


I don't understand why people are so heart broken about removing these horses. It's for the good of the environment and the individual horses health.


Pray tell, what are they invading?

Feral pigs are invasive, as they will kill your children if given the chance while hungry. Never heard of a mustang attack, unless you are referring to Sweetwaters football team.

Obvious troll is obvious.

Edit to add: look up what the impact of not having herd animals to trample the soil is. There are no grazing herds to take the place of the buffalo. Horses do a fairly decent job of this.

of course, our federal version of "land management" has really done a number on our soil. My grandfather almost died from dust pneumonia during the dust bowl. They almost screwed up the most lush prairie in the world that time. Why should we start trusting them now?

I don't....i live in cotton country. I know what their version of "land management" is, and how much soil erosion happens because of it.

Bunch of pseudointellectual morons in DC, for sure.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
The horses don't do any damage, and as far as grazing land goes, horses and cattle graze together quite well.

When these horses are captured by the US government, according to the news I watched (we were all u2ued about it), they get rounded up, stuffed into a smallish area, and many end up dying from lack of food and water.

Up here in Canada we have a different approach. People may apply for a license per horse to be gently captured, and that person has to be able to prove the horse is being looked after, like a person would be expected to look after their horses.

They are a protected species. And much loved.


www.srd.alberta.ca...

www.qp.alberta.ca...



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Deny ignorance:


Modern horses, zebras, and asses belong to the genus Equus, the only surviving genus in a once diverse family, the Equidae. Based on fossil records, the genus appears to have originated in North America about 4 million years ago and spread to Eurasia (presumably by crossing the Bering land bridge) 2 to 3 million years ago. Following that original emigration, there were additional westward migrations to Asia and return migrations back to North America, as well as several extinctions of Equus species in North America.

The last prehistoric North American horses died out between 13,000 and 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene, but by then Equus had spread to Asia, Europe, and Africa.
Source: www.livescience.com...

Perhaps if one wished to present an opinion under the heading of a Science and Technology forum, one might wish to actually conduct some research... that link was found within 2 minutes using a simple Google search. That doesn't seem much of a task.

Just sayin'......

TheRedneck

i hope you read that link because it says horses in america ARE feral , or at least designated as such and that they are listed as non-native by most wilflife agencies. it seems u just backed up the OPs claim. they maybe majestic creatures BUT that doesnt discout the OP.


edit invasive to non-native

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Another_Nut]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut

fe-ral

–adjective
  1. existing in a natural state, as animals or plants; not domesticated or cultivated; wild.

  2. having reverted to the wild state, as from domestication: a pack of feral dogs roaming the woods.

  3. of or characteristic of wild animals; ferocious; brutal.


(formatting mine to match source site)
Source: dictionary.reference.com...

"Feral" does not mean "non-native". Listing something on a government document does not make it so.

Deny Ignorance. Again.


TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
from your link

"Customarily, such wild horses that survive today are designated "feral" and regarded as intrusive, exotic animals, unlike the native horses that died out at the end of the Pleistocene. But as E. caballus, they are not so alien after all. The fact that horses were domesticated before they were reintroduced matters little from a biological viewpoint. Indeed, domestication altered them little, as we can see by how quickly horses revert to ancient behavioral patterns in the wild"


notice the word "wild" and "as we can see by how quickly horses revert to ancient behavioral patterns in the wild"

wild is the 1st definition you gave in your reply


edit id to is

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Another_Nut]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut

One of us is having trouble with reading comprehension here. The quote you just gave explains that despite any previous domestication/import by man, the horses running wild today are no different than the ones that were originally here.

Hence, horses are neither invasive nor non-indigenous.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
your link says that

"So a good argument can be made that it, too, should enjoy protection as a form of native wildlife."

an arguement could be made and i wouldnt disagree . i have watched cloud and his family grow and loved every moment. but that argument hasent been made. so as much as i dont like the OP i cant fault him on his facts . even if they are from the gov. until someone changes the status of these hoses they are feral and non-native to most wildlife agencies.

i believe in the last docu on Cloud when they were being rounded up something was said eluding to the fact that they are considered non-native...ill have to rewatch. as much as i dont like the ops statement ill let him say it as long as its true.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut

The OP says:

These horses do not belong in the wild. They're domestic animals, and have no natural predators in this part of the world.

and

I don't understand why people are so heart broken about removing these horses. It's for the good of the environment and the individual horses health.
  • The horses, if feral, definitely belong in the wild by definition.

  • It is shown in the source I posted (which is also mirrored on many other sites in the Google search I linked to) that these horses are not domesticated, having been born in the wild and never held in captivity by humans. Again, witness the description of "feral".

  • It is well-known, as mentioned by SpaDe_ earlier, that horses are prey for some of the predators. They can be and are taken by canine packs or by cougars.

  • There is no evidence that horses are harmful to the environment. The FWS reports refuse to take into account domestic cattle they have allowed to graze the land in numbers on orders of magnitude greater than the feral horse population.

  • The only impact on the health of the horses is that they are typically beaten, starved to death, or forced to run until they injure their hooves. That is not advantageous to their health in any way; rather it is brutal and often lethal.

The OP has every right as a member to present his/her opinion. I have every right as a member to present evidence to show the fallacies in their argument.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Just freakin WOW.
MAN is the invasive species.
Get it right.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by PieKeeper
 


I think the only "wild horse" left is the Dzungarian Horse. I do not see the problem in moving them, i do not think it is the best thing to kill them but relocating is fine by me.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
The OP says:

These horses do not belong in the wild. They're domestic animals, and have no natural predators in this part of the world.

and

I don't understand why people are so heart broken about removing these horses. It's for the good of the environment and the individual horses health.
  • The horses, if feral, definitely belong in the wild by definition.

  • It is shown in the source I posted (which is also mirrored on many other sites in the Google search I linked to) that these horses are not domesticated, having been born in the wild and never held in captivity by humans. Again, witness the description of "feral".


From Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "having escaped from domestication and become wild"

Just because they are living in the wild, does not mean they belong there.


Originally posted by TheRedneck
  • It is well-known, as mentioned by SpaDe_ earlier, that horses are prey for some of the predators. They can be and are taken by canine packs or by cougars.


  • I can't imagine these predators are keeping the population in check. There aren't very many wolves living in the wild right now, they are just recovering from near extinction in North America. Coyotes don't hunt large game in packs.


    Originally posted by TheRedneck
  • There is no evidence that horses are harmful to the environment. The FWS reports refuse to take into account domestic cattle they have allowed to graze the land in numbers on orders of magnitude greater than the feral horse population.


  • As far as I know, the FWS doesn't administer cattle grazing lands. Also, horses do indeed cause harm to their habitat:


    The burgeoning horse population level on Sheldon is causing negative impacts to native wildlife and their habitats. Along stream banks and at spring heads, impacts include trampling of vegetation,
    exclusion of native species by dominant stud horses, and contamination from feces and urine.
    Monitoring information from 2002 concluded that 44% of all streams and 80% of the springs on the refuge are heavily or severely impacted by horses. The feral horse population has continued to increase since that report. Feral horses also cause habitat degradation by removal and trampling
    of vegetation in upland areas.
    When cattle grazing was permanently removed from Sheldon NWR in the early 1990s because of these same conflicts with wildlife, the population of feral horses was about 200-300 animals. However, these horses have no natural predators and their populations increase at a very high rate when compared to populations of deer, antelope and other native species for which the refuge was established. The herd’s growth rate is very strong, averaging about 23% net increase per year.




    Originally posted by TheRedneck
  • The only impact on the health of the horses is that they are typically beaten, starved to death, or forced to run until they injure their hooves. That is not advantageous to their health in any way; rather it is brutal and often lethal.


  • The horses are generally malnourished and underweight because of direct competition with indigenous species for food. Poor nutrition will also contribute to hoof injuries.

    [edit on 14-7-2010 by PieKeeper]



    posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 02:19 PM
    link   
    Found the solution
    www.abovetopsecret.com...



    posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 03:09 PM
    link   
    If you want to get rid of all "non-indigenous" creatures...clear out the cows and pigs and everything else INCLUDING humans. Most American citizens are not indigenous to the country and those who actually would be considered "indigenous" have been hunted down or subject to massive government persecution. No wonder we as a people have such a connection with these horses. Either way, I sort of agree with TheRedneck. You should do a little more research. Oh and if anyone is going to say something about this...I know native americans aren't truly "native" but neither are you.



    posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:23 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by itbbeyond11
    Either way, I sort of agree with TheRedneck. You should do a little more research. Oh and if anyone is going to say something about this...I know native americans aren't truly "native" but neither are you.


    I'm a student of Wildlife Biology. I'm studying to go into this field. This is a topic that's been discussed in class. Human interaction with wildlife is a separate topic. I'm discussing the status of feral horses and their impact on the environment.



    posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 04:37 PM
    link   
    reply to post by PieKeeper
     


    If you're going to rant about the environment I'm just saying look at ALL the aspects because they are all related to one another. Impact causes impact causes impact. Being a student of what you are, you should know that. You can't just single one out. Along with that, maybe bring up the impact of feedlot cattle and the invasion of Zea mays in the US's farms? Because that seems to be a bigger deal. Because it caused most of the problems with the American grasslands anyway. Subtract grazing species you get a lot more trouble than it's worth...



    posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 05:21 PM
    link   
    Those are separate but equally important issues. This thread is a response to attitudes associated with the "Mustang Conspiracy" video.



    posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 12:03 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by TheRedneck
    The FWS reports refuse to take into account domestic cattle they have allowed to graze the land in numbers on orders of magnitude greater than the feral horse population.


    My fault for not seeing this earlier, but the article that I posted does mention this issue.


    When cattle grazing was permanently removed from Sheldon NWR in the early 1990s because of these same conflicts with wildlife, the population of feral horses was about 200-300 animals.


    [edit on 15-7-2010 by PieKeeper]



    new topics

    top topics



     
    1

    log in

    join