Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Dina Titus (1st District of Nevada)
WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Dina Titus (NV-01) and 17 of her colleagues today sent a bipartisan, bicameral letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting a review of the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Wild Horse and Burro Program following reports that wild horses have been slaughtered. Supporters of the letter include Congressional Wild Horse Caucus Co-Chairs Juan Ciscomani (AZ-06), Steve Cohen (TN-09), and Mark Pocan (WI-02) as well as Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ). The letter is also endorsed by American Wild Horse Conservation.
“We now know what we have long suspected — that the BLM has been selling off wild horses that end up in slaughterhouses,” said Congresswoman Dina Titus, Co-Chair of the Congressional Wild Horse Caucus. “This practice must end now. I am leading my Congressional colleagues in demanding an investigation of the Wild Horse and Burro Sale Program to ensure wild horses and burros received the protections they are guaranteed by federal law.”
“It’s long past time to fix the ongoing failures in how America’s wild horses are managed. For years, across both Republican and Democrat administrations, we’ve seen alarming reports of hostility toward these animals and serious questions about how the Bureau of Land Management is carrying out its responsibilities. This cannot be a partisan issue. It’s a stewardship issue. I’m proud to join this bipartisan effort to demand accountability, protect our wild horses, and push for real solutions that address the problem head-on.” said Congressman Juan Ciscomani
“The Administration knows what it is doing. They are circumventing the law to benefit landowners who want to get rid of all the wild horses, which are American heritage that we should value. More oversight is needed,” said Congressman Steve Cohen.
“Our laws demand that we protect wild horses, not send them to slaughter. Congress has always worked in a bipartisan manner to protect these animals, and we need accountability and oversight at the Bureau of Land Management immediately. We hope this request will force the Administration to do the right thing,” said Congressman Mark Pocan.
“Wild horses are a national treasure. Year after year, Congress has barred the Bureau of Land Management from slaughtering them. Yet now there is a concerning report that Trump’s agency is recklessly selling wild horses to buyers who slaughter them. I am calling on GAO to investigate,” said Senator Cory Booker.
“The GAO investigation is a critical step toward uncovering and eliminating abuses within the Sale Authority Program, abuses documented through AWHC’s longstanding investigation and recently brought to national attention by The New York Times. No federal program should allow America’s treasured and legally protected wild horses and burros to be funneled into the slaughter pipeline”, said Patricia Miller, Chair, Board of Directors & Executive Director, American Wild Horse Conservation. “We are deeply grateful to Representative Dina Titus and her fellow Congressional Wild Horse Caucus co-chairs, Representatives Ciscomani, Cohen, and Pocan, for leading this essential oversight effort and advancing the agency accountability and lasting reform necessary to ensure these animals receive the protections promised to them under federal law.”
The letter states: “This request is particularly urgent in light of recent reporting by The New York Times detailing how changes in the BLM’s management of wild horses and burros could exploit a legal loophole to facilitate their movement into the slaughter pipeline. The reporting raises renewed concerns about whether BLM’s Sale Program is being used to circumvent longstanding congressional protections intended to prevent federally protected wild horses and burros from being sold or otherwise funneled into slaughter.
“A comprehensive GAO review would provide Congress with an independent assessment of whether BLM’s current practices adequately protect federally managed wild horses and burros, comply with congressional directives, and appropriately safeguard taxpayer resources. It would also build upon GAO’s prior examination of BLM’s wild horse management and sales practices, allowing Congress to determine whether safeguards remain effective nearly two decades later.
“Most importantly, this review would help Congress determine whether the Sale Program is functioning as a legitimate placement mechanism or has become a pathway through which federally protected wild horses and burros can predictably enter the slaughter pipeline after title transfers. The recent reporting in The New York Times, together with BLM’s expanded reliance on removals and sales, makes an independent examination especially timely.
“GAO’s findings would provide Congress with the factual basis necessary to strengthen safeguards, improve reporting requirements, ensure compliance with appropriations restrictions and the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, and consider additional statutory changes where necessary.”
The letter asks the GAO to address the following issues:
Implementation of Sale Authority
· How has BLM implemented its Sale Authority, including “sales without limitation,” since enactment of the 2004 amendments to the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act?
· How many horses and burros have been sold annually under Sale Authority since 2004, and what trends have emerged over time?
· How has BLM’s reliance on sales changed following implementation of “The Path Forward” and the substantial increase in congressional funding for removals?
· To what extent do current group and individual sales operate differently from the historical “sales without limitation” that Congress sought to restrict through appropriations language?
Purchaser Screening and Internal Controls
· What policies, procedures, and internal controls govern purchaser screening, approval, monitoring, and post-sale oversight?
· How does BLM identify and manage high-risk or repeat purchasers?
· Does BLM maintain records of individuals or entities that have purchased large numbers of horses or burros over time, including purchases made through related individuals or entities?
· What mechanisms exist to identify purchasers with connections to livestock auctions, kill buyers, brokers, slaughter facilities, or other high-risk entities?
· How frequently has BLM investigated allegations that sold animals entered slaughter channels, and what enforcement actions, including repossessions, purchaser suspensions, or debarments, have resulted?
Post-Sale Outcomes and Enforcement
· What information does BLM collect regarding the disposition of horses and burros after title transfers?
· To what extent can BLM determine whether sold animals ultimately enter commercial slaughter channels?
· Under what circumstances does BLM have authority to repossess or otherwise recover an animal after a sale?
· What criteria does BLM use to determine whether to intervene when a sold horse or burro is subsequently identified at an auction, kill pen, or other slaughter-related facility?
· How many horses and burros has BLM repossessed following a sale during the past ten years, and what circumstances led to those actions?
· How many purchasers have been suspended, debarred, or otherwise restricted during the same period?
· Does BLM distinguish between adoption and sale outcomes when reporting placement success to Congress and the public?
Compliance with Congressional Direction
· Is BLM administering the Sale Program in a manner consistent with annual appropriations language prohibiting the destruction of healthy wild horses and burros or their sale for processing into commercial products?
· Are BLM’s current sales practices consistent with the purpose and intent of congressional restrictions on “sales without limitation”?
· Does BLM have adequate safeguards to prevent sales that it knows, or reasonably should know, are likely to result in animals entering the slaughter pipeline?
· To what extent could current Sale Authority practices undermine congressional prohibitions by transferring animals to purchasers who subsequently resell them for slaughter?
· Are current policies and oversight mechanisms sufficient to ensure that federally protected animals are not predictably diverted into slaughter?
Program Management and Congressional Oversight
· What relationship exists between BLM’s removal targets, off-range holding population, adoption rates, and reliance on sales?
· Has BLM evaluated whether its current removal and sale strategies create incentives to prioritize rapid disposal over durable placement outcomes?
· What statutory, regulatory, administrative, or reporting changes would strengthen congressional oversight and accountability?
###