Environmentalists challenge ‘inhumane’ Nevada horse corral

Joe Duhownik

PHOENIX (CN) — A Ninth Circuit panel is likely to uphold a decision approving the construction of one of the largest off range horse and burro corrals in the U.S.

In a Phoenix courtroom Tuesday morning, the three-judge panel cast doubt on claims made by wild horse advocates that the Winnemucca off-range corral in Nevada is insufficient to humanely care for up to 4,000 feral horses and burros, despite expert testimony from veterinarians.

“Where’s the beef here?” Bill Clinton-appointed U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Tallman, the most vocal of the panel, asked the plaintiff, Friends of Animals. “You keep giving me conclusions. I’m asking for specific information here.

Though the Wild Hose and Burro Act of 1971 legally defines some horses across the West as “wild,” and establishes nearly 10% of public lands as protected wild horse and burro territory, genetic studies show that most if not all horses in the West are feral descendants of domesticated horses, having escaped tribal and ranchlands as recently as decades ago and as early as the arrival of the Spanish Conquistadors.

Whether the horses were present in pre-colonial America, most experts agree that their presence in large quantities is detrimental to the ecological balance of their environment, especially in the desert Southwest.

To manage their impact, the Bureau of Land Management regularly rounds up both feral and “wild” horses and burros, temporarily holding them in off-range corrals while they await adoption, sale, or placement in long-term off-range pastures. The bureau spends more than $100,000 annually on holding horses and burros.

The international animal advocacy group Friends of Animals sued the bureau of 2022, claiming that it failed to take a hard look at the impact both to the horses and the environment when it approved a contract with JS Livestock to construct what was at the time the largest off-range corral in the country, designed to hold up t0 4,000 animals. As of today, the corral holds just under 3,500, providing more than 750 square feet per animal.

A trial judge granted summary judgment to the bureau in July 2024, prompting an appeal from Friends of Animals.

“This facility is profoundly unsuitable because it sits on flood-prone soil and creates inhumane conditions,” plaintiff attorney Andreia Marcuccio told the panel. “The guidance itself is extremely vague and doesn’t apply to the unique issues with this facility.”

In its environmental assessment, the bureau found no significant threat of environmental impact by the construction and operation of the corral, and subsequently decided not to publish a full environmental impact statement.

Marcuccio said that decision flew in the faces of the plaintiffs’ own panel of veterinarians who say the corral is inhumane. The bureau made its decision based on its own Comprehensive Animal Welfare Program guidelines, requiring at least 700 square feet per animal, specific drainage to avoid floods and adequate shade and shelter for sick or weak animals among other things.

When asked, Marcuccio couldn’t provide specific evidence that the corral in question has held any more sick, injured or dying horses than any of the 28 other off-range corrals in the country.

The contract with JS Livestock also requires “two to four” pen cleanings per year, which Marcuccio argues is not nearly enough, given the millions of pounds of waste that thousands of horses would produce annually.

Department of Justice attorney Rebecca Jaffe clarified that the bureau can order the contractor to clean the pen more often if the cleanings aren’t adequate. She told the panel that conditions at the Winnemucca are no different than other corrals across the country.

She added that many of the plaintiffs’ arguments pertain to the potential stress and injury to horses caused by the method of roundup and the bureau’s lack of consideration of those effects on the horses. But Jaffe said the effects of the roundup are subject to a separate rulemaking decision and environmental assessment.

The decision subject to the lawsuit, whether to construct and operate the corral, is independent of how the horses are brought to it, she said.

To address the waste issue, the bureau required JS Livestock to obtain a Nevada concentrated animal feeding operation permit, which provides rigid guidelines for managing waste and removing animal waste, including ensuring no waste ends up in surrounding surface water and limiting the amount of waste that can seep into groundwater.

Marcuccio argues that the bureau relied too heavily on the state permit and treated it as a replacement for federal requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act.

But Tallman asked her if the state permit requires the same conditions required by NEPA, wouldn’t the presence of the permit serve as evidence that the contractor will follow NEPA.

Marcuccio said the presence of the permit alone doesn’t prove a lack of significant environmental impact.

When asked, Marcuccio could provide no evidence that the corral is currently polluting surrounding surface or groundwater.

U.S. Circuit Judges Bridget Bade and Kenneth Lee, both Donald Trump appointees, rounded out the panel.