Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild&Free
Wild animals move between ecosystems all the time, and we don't try to control that. Where I was from in BC, moose were not around at the turn of the century when settlers first arrived. Apparently there was a large fire somewhere to the north that opened up a passage that allowed moose to enter the area where they thrived until hunting drastically reduced their numbers in the mid 80s and 90s. There were large conservation efforts put in place to rebuild this invasive moose population. Why is this scenario different then the horses?
|
This secenario is different than the horses, because moose are a native species, and horses were introduced. As you said, wild animals move around, and that is their nature to do so.
I would really like to remove most of the emotion out of the debate, and start addressing facts.
Facts are, that the horses were introduced. Not thousands of years ago, but in the early 1900's. Regardless of how many generations they have been there, they are all still an introduced species. By definition as such, they do not belong in the ecosystem.
The emotional part comes from the fact that they are horses, and they don't seem to be doing any harm. The fact is, this can't be proven one way or another by anyone on this forum. Feral and introduced species have been scientifically proven to damage ecosystems in virtually every part of the world. Until we recieve a full biological study, including plant migration, we won't have a correct answer.
My problem is the money that gets spent on that study, will be paid for by tax payers, and will likely cost 7 figures. I can also guarantee that kind of money has already been spent over the last 200 years in varoius attemps at "management", enforcement, etc.
As with most other situations, eradication is not option, as it would be difficult to acomplish without spending another 7 figure number, and I don't want my money spent like that either.
What I would like to see is that these horses can be managed in a humane and productive way, and that a reasonable compromise is met by all parties involved. We have existing laws in place and the framework exists to acomplish this without spending a pile of tax payer money.
Calling them truly wild, which puts them on a pedastal, is an issue, and the public really needs to be educated as to how they got there in the first place, and what the potential risks are if they stay unmanaged. I don't think anyone here, that I have read, is for that. I also don't think anyone here is for the establishment of a protected area for these horses to live in, which of course, would mean restricted access.
So maybe instead of arguing amonst ourselves, about words and grass damage and other, quite frankly fluff, we can discuss what each of us would like to see done moving forward. At least I think we can all agree that doing nothing is not the way to go?
R.