Here we go again re: feral horses

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by Rman

I have read this entire thread. I have seen the horses out there on occasion.
I have a few questions, and I am hoping you will answer them.

These are, by definition, feral horses? They are not truly wild? Again, wild would be a deer, or moose, or elk?
I do not see the traction to be gained by calling something that it is not.

Ive watched multiple generations of horses out there born in the wild. They have be that way for for more years than ive been out there and ive travelled that country one way or another since i was born in 1974 so yes many to me are wild as they have never know nor has 20+ generations that I know of prior to thatknow any hand of man or seen the inside of a fence!!

Originally Posted by Rman

Second, I am not one to judge if these horses are causing damage or not. Introduced and invasive species, again, by definition, take habitat and feed away from native species. For every blade of grass a horse eats, that same blade could have been eaten by a native species? I am failing to connect with the "there is enough to go around" argument, so please help me with this.

There is in most of the foothills and eastern slopes more actual grass lands than there has been for a hundred years or better so until I see proof that the horses are actually depriving any other animals from feed I dont believe they are hurting the other wildlife populations. I still feel they need to be controlled but just because they dont need to grow in populations and need to be stabilized

Originally Posted by Rman

I believe I understand the emotion connected to the horses, and I also agree that short term, there would be a stink involved if there was an attempt at a cull. I also believe that allot this comes from the fact many do not understand the difference between wild and feral. It is my opinion that if this difference was explained correctly, then quite of bit of the emotion would be removed. Would you say the same? If not, why?

I dont feel it would cause enough of a change in feelings. People have thoughts on horses no matter where they come from. And that wont change if you tell them anything. Peoples perspective on horses isnt based on how they got where they are.

Originally Posted by Rman

I will not be shy, and obviously believe that feral and introduced species are a threat to any habitat. Moose in Newfoundland are a poor example, as this is one of the rare times that it worked. Those same moose are hunted, and managed. I don't understand swans, and brown trout, and all the rest? Again, by definition alone, feral animals take away habitat from native species.
Other than some great photo ops, what purpose do these animals serve? All of the rest of the animals mentioned on this thread serve a purpose. We can even hunt a bison in this province, but not a feral horse?

You dont feel Brown Trout take away from native fishes? And to you they serve no purpose but to many they are part of the west country, part of many generations of their families childhoods seeing these animals out there. So because you as a human cant hunt something it serves no purpose?

Originally Posted by Rman

Before my hard earned tax dollars are spent funding a so called management society, that would only benefit the very few involved, and some escaped livestock, I would like some of these simple questions answered. My opinion is here to be swayed.

R.