Updated Horse Rant
It's time I update my rant about our wild/feral horses.
According to the BLM there's currently 61,523 wild/feral horses in the United States. From that same source, there was a large removal of horses in 2021, 2022, and 2024, with over 10,000 horses being removed each of those years. Other removals vary from as low as 1,689 horses and as many as 16,971 horses (data going back to 2012). They claim that the herd sizes can double about every 4 years. This is a decrease compared to prior years. (Sorry, newest charts I could find only updated to 2023.)
Here in Nevada we have an estimated 37,426 horses, more than every other state combined (24,097 horses, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming). Let's compare those numbers to other animal populations here in Nevada: -Mule Deer: 73,000 (steady increase since 2014, but back in the mid 1980s the population was closer to 200,000) -Pronghorn: 35,500 (so just under 3,000 less animals than horses) -Elk: 13,500 (less than half of our horse population) -California Bighorn Sheep: 1,900 (WAY less than horses) -Desert Bighorn Sheep: 6,000 (over 30,000 less animals than horses) -Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep: 149 (it's amazing these animals are even still here) -Mountain Goats: 303 (so few!) -Moose: 130 (barely any) Know what's funny about all the animals I just listed? THEY ALL HAVE HUNTING SEASONS AND THEIR POPULATIONS ARE MANAGED. But somehow we can't do that for horses whose populations dwarf all of those species except for mule deer.
So why do these horses get so much hate?
The first thing to understand about the horses that are out on the range now is that they're domesticated horses. Domestication changes animals, and despite what mustang lovers will claim it's indisputable that domesticated horses are changed from their wild ancestors.
Horses went extinct here in the Americas around 10,000 years ago. Equus scotti were our original horses. They completely disappeared from the fossil record. The modern horse, Equus caballus, evolved in the Old World. They were domesticated around 6,000 years ago with some speculation as to where exactly this took place (it's possible and seems likely it happened in multiple places at the same time). From what I've seen it's believed that at least some of these horses originally descended from the horses we had here in North America that had crossed over the land bridge.
Native nations will share that they had horses before settlers arrived in the 1600s and the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 where modern "wild" horses are credited as coming from, but this can be explained by Spanish settlers who likely brought horses to the Americas back in the early 1500s. Fossil records back this up with three horse remains dating before the Pueblo Revolt showing evidence of wearing bridles, eating domestic crops, and having human-treated injuries. As far as I'm aware, this is the earliest evidence of horses in the states post-extinction. People will claim that pockets of horses actually survived the extinction but I haven't found solid evidence of that.
So the Americas evolved without horses present for a span of about 10,000 years. What changed in that time?
Well for starters, a whole lot of animals went extinct that probably hunted early horses. Dire wolves, North American sabertoothed cats, American lions, American scimitars, American cheetahs, shortfaced bears, and even humans used to hunt horses. Horses are also missing their competitors: ancient bison, the Hagerman horse (more closely related to zebras than horses), mammoths, camelops, llamas, oxen. No animal exists in a vacuum and having predators and competitors around helps keeps populations in check. In the span from the late Pleistocene to the early 1500s North America continued to evolve without horses present. Ecosystems changed, native wildlife evolved, and then settlers came and messed that up even more.
Not to mention back when horses originally roamed North America my state still had ancient Lake Lahontan covering a significant portion of the land. Now we're the driest state in the country (that's right, even drier than Arizona or New Mexico with much thanks to the rain shadow caused by the Sierra Nevada mountain range). We can't support the same life today as we did back then due to geological changes alone. A lot of our country was vastly different than it is today.
So what about when horses were reintroduced?
Our ecosystem was still a pretty different place even compared to back then thanks to colonization. Settlers brought invasive species, stopped indigenous groups from practicing their land management strategies this nation has evolved with, and killed many native species. Here in Nevada we used to have gray wolves, lynx, and grizzly bears, for example, who all likely would have hunted horses. Even if the predators don't hunt the animals directly their presence alone can lead to lower birth rates and more movement, which helps prevent areas from being over-grazed. We also didn't have livestock, plants like cheatgrass, and we didn't break up vital habitat animals depend on and migrate through. Nevada is mostly government owned open land. Horses are able to thrive thanks to that combined with a lack of predators. It's no mistake that we have more horses roaming our state than any other state by such a large margin.
But what's the big deal? Why does it matter how many horses there are?
No habitat can sustain unlimited growth.
Here in my state some species are threatened by horses and other livestock. Which, quick aside, wild horse advocates are quick to point at the finger at livestock while ignoring the fact that horses are livestock animals and thus part of every criticism they have of livestock. But I digress.
One issue is the spread of species like cheatgrass, which is worsening our fire season. It out-competes native grasses, it grows densely and dries early in the season, its shallow roots don't help our ecosystems compared to native plants that help the soil, and it survives the wildfires it contributes to. It's also a low-quality forage for livestock, and the seeds can cause issues for pets. Advocates for horses will say horses control cheatgrass by eating it. The problem is horses also can help spread cheatgrass (this is not a problem unique to horses).
Trampling native grasses or overgrazing them is another problem. Our native sand rice grass (formerly "Indian rice grass") is vital for sage grouse and other wildlife. It requires undisturbed soil with mycorrihizal fungi (fires can also harm these habitats). Even if the horses don't eat the grass, their presence alone can make the habitat unsuitable for this rice grass. Unlike cheatgrass, rice grass isn't spread in a horse's feces.
There's also just issues with direct competition. Here horses only really have one predator: mountain lions. That's not enough to keep their populations in check, especially since mountain lion populations aren't that high compared to the horses (around 2,200 mountain lions across the 7th largest US state).
So what's the solution? Depends on who you ask.
Some people are fine with the round-ups. We pay somewhere around $141.8 million for round-ups, captive care, and adoptions. Keep in mind that's taxpayer money. A lot of critics say this causes unnecessary stress for the horses, causes injury or even death, and causes hierarchy problems and can even harm biodiversity. If you've ever seen a holding facility they're pretty sad dirt lots, too. Adopting out the horses is a hard process. Many are convinced all the horses go to meat slaughter.
Birth control is another option. As with any option, there's criticism with this method as well. Costs, efficacy, the fact that it's a temporary solution, and some will argue this unfairly affects biodiversity. It also doesn't remove existing horses from the range, just stops them from reproducing, so this doesn't solve any current overpopulation problems. It's hard to dart enough horses especially when you consider that any contraceptive isn't going to be 100% effective. The darts have to be placed right by volunteers who also need to keep record of which horses have been darted. It's a lot of work.
Now my hot take? Eat the horses. Our wild/feral horses are currently protected by law so hunting/eating them is out of the question. But laws can change. We could start treating them like our other native wildlife and issue tags for them (and then that money can go back to wildlife conservation). Horse meat is eaten in other parts of the world. Horses were hunted by man longer than we were riding them. Horse meat was legal in the past in the US. So I don't know, people have big feelings about horses and it's unlikely to happen anytime soon if ever, but that's my unpopular opinion.
