Scientists agree that both horses and cattle are destructive to our western
lands and native wildlife species. The only ones to dispute this are horse
advocates and cattlemen. If the best argument in favor of horses is that they
are less destructive than cattle, then this is hardly a great vote of
confidence. It does no good to reduce cattle only to see them replaced by
equally voracious horses. Yet, advocates would have Americans
choose between more horses, or more cattle--and perpetuate the damage and
management costs of either or both. Americans should not be fooled by the
special interests. We will be far better off (as will our lands and our
wildlife) to demand reductions in the numbers of both.
To "Jim Schnepel" why are we fighting to keep an INVASIVE species? Does
Florida fight to keep the big snakes in the everglades?Imagine this
was a bunch of wart hogs running around the hills near salt lake, would you
still want them around?