Reading 6 Should We Protect Wild Horses? By Chuck Klosterman, March 21, 2014 Question: In the United illegal to kill a wild horse States, it’s on public lands. Yet wild horses can have destructive grazing indigenous behavior, and grazers and browsers (deer, for example) have to compete with them for land. . . Is it unethical T.G., NEW YORK to protect wild horses? . . .Your argument is that wild horses hurt the Response: that wild horses have become part of environment; I’d argue the environment itself. Horses alter the ecological landscape, but be altering the landscape by eliminating the horses. we’d If your point is that a degree of in the human hypocrisy there’s relationship with horses, I [agree]. There are certain animals humans tend to care about more than others, and it can seem If your thoughts on animal rights exist at one of the arbitrary. philosophical poles if you believe no animal should ever be — killed, or if you believe any animal can be killed for any reason this question is easy. But most people are — somewhere in the middle, holding views that always don’t make rational sense. For example, I find the extermination of invasive pythons in Florida less unsettling than the extermination of invasive in Nevada. This is my Mustangs emotional reaction. But forces people to consider things ethics that might contradict their feelings. The estimates there are about Bureau of Land Management 33,780 wild horses on public U.S. rangeland. The optimal population would be smaller by several thousand. Some may argue that thinning the herd increases the quality of life for the species as whole, which is true not one of — assuming you’re the horses to be eliminated. I would ultimately unethical to protect wild say this: It’s horses (which are currently not categorized as endangered) if our only reasoning is that we happen to horses and believe like they deserve treatment. Our policy and criteria for preferential horse populations should be the same as our policy for coyotes or any other mammal. But none of these species should be radically culled unless they pose a direct threat to human which does not appear to be the case. Now, if that sounds as if human life over nonhuman life, I’m “privileging” because I am. I humans and nonhumans are it’s don’t think
Reading 6 Should We Protect Wild Horses? By Chuck Klosterman, March 21, 2014 Question: In the United States, it’s illegal to kill a wild horse on public lands. Yet wild horses can have destructive grazing behavior, and indigenous grazers and browsers (deer, for example) have to compete with them for land. . . Is it unethical to protect wild horses? T.G., NEW YORK Response: . . .Your argument is that wild horses hurt the environment; I’d argue that wild horses have become part of the environment itself. Horses alter the ecological landscape, but we’d be altering the landscape by eliminating the horses. If your point is that there’s a degree of hypocrisy in the human relationship with horses, I [agree]. There are certain animals humans tend to care about more than others, and it can seem arbitrary. If your thoughts on animal rights exist at one of the philosophical poles — if you believe no animal should ever be killed, or if you believe any animal can be killed for any reason — this question is easy. But most people are somewhere in the middle, holding views that don’t always make rational sense. For example, I find the extermination of invasive pythons in Florida less unsettling than the extermination of invasive Mustangs in Nevada. This is my emotional reaction. But ethics forces people to consider things that might contradict their feelings. The Bureau of Land Management estimates there are about 33,780 wild horses on public U.S. rangeland. The optimal population would be smaller by several thousand. Some may argue that thinning the herd increases the quality of life for the species as whole, which is true — assuming you’re not one of the horses to be eliminated. I would ultimately say this: It’s unethical to protect wild horses (which are currently not categorized as endangered) if our only reasoning is that we happen to like horses and believe they deserve preferential treatment. Our policy and criteria for horse populations should be the same as our policy for coyotes or any other mammal. But none of these species should be radically culled unless they pose a direct threat to human which does not appear to be the case. Now, if that sounds as if I’m “privileging” human life over nonhuman life, it’s because I am. I don’t think humans and nonhumans are
wild_horses_day_1.docx