Hello and Happy Friday to everyone!

We had our meeting with Theodore Roosevelt National Park today.  As promised, I will share what was discussed.

First, I had to apologize to acting Superintendent Finley.  Last week when Regional Director Bert Frost was in town, they emailed me to try to set up a meeting.  I found her emails in my spam folder when she replied to my email this week.  Modern Technology!

CHWHA President Christine Kman and Vice-President Gary Kman met with acting Superintendent Nancy Finley and Chief of Resource Management, Blake McCann.  We talked casually for almost 1-1/2 hours and walked away feeling good about the things that were discussed and the future management of the wild horses that call the park home. 

One of the big things that Superintendent Finley said is that she hopes that any future decisions the park makes about the horses is not judged based on past actions. 

We are all hoping that it is truly a new day for the wild horses that call the park home.  We all need to move forward with that mindset.  Understandably, the public still has some trust issues with the park.  We have also seen the park begin to work on being more transparent.  As we said before, we will continue to celebrate even the smallest steps forward.

Without a doubt, we feel that today was a step forward. 

Superintendent Finley explained that when the management planning process ended in April, the only written policy that they can revert back to is the 1978 management plan.  That plan, she said, has a good number of “tools” that they can use to manage the herd going forward.  I explained to her that when there are talks about the 1978 plan, advocates immediately go to the part that says 35-60 horses.  Superintendent Finley and Blake McCann helped us feel better about the fact that the reversion to the 1978 plan is not necessarily about the number of horses that are allowed in this herd, but what is outlined that can be done with respect to managing the horses.  For reference, the full 1978 plan is available to view in the research library section of our website. There are no current plans to initiate a new formal management planning process. 

What is that target number? 

The answer to that question is still being considered.  They do admit that they are at the high end of what they would like to see with the 201 horses currently in the park. 

The first topic that we brought to the table, was the one we heard the most from those of you who emailed, commented or PM’d us: the use of GonaCon on this herd. 

I explained that there is not as much known about GonaCon and a lot of questions that advocates have especially when it comes to permanent sterility.  Those concerns paired with the lack of transparency from the park make it hard to have any confidence that the park is NOT trying to replicate the 19 of 24 mares that have not returned to fertility since 2013.  That, coupled with the fact that 125 mares aged 2-25 have only produced 8 foals this year makes the continued use of GonaCon concerning. 

They both explained that birth control has been the only tool they have been using because there have not been any captures, and they do need to control the population. 

For clarification, we did let them know that we understand that the population has to be controlled.  We understand that birth control is one method.  We expressed that we would prefer it be PZP to which they stated, and we do know is true, that there can be issues and permanent sterilization with PZP too.  We also are not aware of any research into moving from GonaCon as birth control to PZP and what the impacts of that on the herd are.  If anyone has that, please share. 

At this time, all of the female horses are being treated with fertility control.  That is not to say that will continue.  As plans evolve, and that is what we are in the beginning phases of, a plan that will continue to evolve. horses may be taken off birth control and allowed to foal. 

It is also possible that younger horses will be removed. 

Again, we understand that they may need to cull the herd.  The issue comes when EVERY young horse is being removed, especially when we agreed that older horses make up half the herd. 

So, when we talk about the need for genetic diversity what does that look like?

Introducing new blood was discussed and we did bring up the possibility of re-introducing Nokota horses.  They were open to that and understandably that requires balance in other areas. 

As we continue this discussion, please remember, the park is charged with managing not only the horses, but the bison, elk, deer, pronghorn and all of the other wildlife within the fenced park. 

So, we know that 200 horses is approaching the high end of what they feel they can effectively manage.  If they introduce new blood, do they cull horses to make room for them?

Would they be able to find homes for some of the horses that make up half the herd that are older? 

No – we don’t want them to remove older horses. 

Ok.

Then we remove the younger horses.  I said we are not opposed to that, what we are opposed to is culling EVERY young horse.  Some need to be left for the herd to continue. 

Ok so maybe this one gets taken off birth control and is allowed to foal.  Maybe that mare is taken off too and foals as well.  Maybe one baby stays and maybe one is culled. 

We are ok with that as long as genetics are taken into consideration when those decisions are being made. 

And yes, as long as the park is doing more than managing numbers, we would happily help advocate for finding homes for these horses. 

The park feels like their hands get tied: we don’t want the use of GonaCon, we don’t want horses culled, we want genetic diversity – how do they juggle all of that AND their other responsibilities within the park AND make every single one of us happy.

My response:

Communication

AND

Transparency

As long as those things are happening, it can go a long way to helping us understand, especially if the public can be part of decisions that are being made. 

I personally offered several times throughout the conversation – “How can our organization help?” They also stated several times throughout the conversation that they hoped that this was the first of many conversations between the park and our organization.  Superintendent Finley also stated that I am welcome to email her anytime with any thoughts or concerns. 

They also stated that sometimes they don’t know how much the public wants to know.  If we see or hear something, we are welcome to email them and ask.  It helps them realize that “Ok, this thing we thought was so small is important to people who love these horses.” 

We also talked about Alluvium.  Superintendent Finley stated first that when they use the term “nuisance” horse, she is not being derogatory.  That is just the formal term for the process that was used to remove him. 

Alluvium’s situation, understandably brings about some very serious questions: Is the park there to protect the wildlife that call the park home, or are our national parks here for the enjoyment of the people, first and foremost. 

Both.

Superintendent Finley stated that throughout their documents it is clear, our national parks were created for the enjoyment of the people BUT they also have to protect the wildlife within the park.  When I brought up Assateague and warnings to the public about the horses that seem to put wildlife first, she said we will start to see that shift as some of the horses are getting too friendly with the public. 

She also stated that they have removed or relocated rattlesnakes in this and other parks.  Blake said that they have removed and/or euthanized bison for being a “nuisance” in the past.  Superintendent Finley also said they have relocated bears at other national parks. 

They are discussing the possibility of fencing the horse camp area.  They DO NOT want to prohibit people from riding their horses in the park.  They are continuing to explore options. 

I did ask that as CHWHA continues to work with our state legislators, is there anything that the State of North Dakota can do to help the park with the management of the horses?  Can Dickinson State University, NDSU or UND assist in helping with management practices?  I reminded them that Governor Burgum stated that the state is willing to help in whatever way they can.  We have also spoken with several gubernatorial candidates who reiterated what Governor Burgum stated. 

Blake they said that they were not in a position to lobby the state for help.  Great!  I am!  Let me know if there is anything we can do to help as we continue to meet and work with our state legislators.

They did talk about the possibility of rounding up the horses to check on the overall health of the herd, take blood samples etc. to help with decisions moving forward.   Because of the rugged landscape of the badlands, this would best be done with a helicopter round up, but they are hesitant because of the negative connotations that go along with that.  We personally have seen the park round up the bison with helicopters and the whole process is extremely gentle.  IF that is what the plan is for the horses AND as long as the horses will be released afterward, we don’t have a problem with this especially if it helps give a clearer picture of how to move forward.

Superintendent Finley has been assigned to the park for 3 months while they continue to look for a new permanent superintendent.  She is here to pave the way for new communication and new management of the horses.  At this time, they are not sure if the horse portal will continue.  Right now, they are choosing to share any news about the horses on social media.

Thank you for reading this very long post.  I think that covers the jist of the conversation today.  Hopefully this is really the first of many.  We are thankful to Superintendent Finley and Chief of Resource Management Blake McCann for taking time out of their busy schedules to meet with us today.

---