Chris Kman - Advocating for the Proper Management of the Wild Horses at Theodore Roosevelt National Park - S1 E7

Okay, hi, I'm Barbara O'Brien and you're listening to the Empathetic Trainer. Today's guest is Chris Command. Chris is a photographer and wild horse advocate. She moved to Northwestern North Dakota in the spring of 2016. Chris is the president of Chasing Wild Horses Wild Horse Advocates. Welcome, chris, glad to have you. Hi, thanks for having me, thanks for taking the time to come talk to us today about your horse life and about the Mustangs at Theodore Roosevelt National Park, this whole thing going on with them, and we definitely want to hear about that and how we can help. But in the meanwhile, just to start out, let's let's learn a little bit more about you. So how did this all begin? Were you always an animal person? I mean, did you remember as a child where horses are a thing, kind of? Just start us out.

Um, yeah, I've always loved horses. My entire life. I've, as a little girl, was always fascinated by horses. I've loved all animals dogs, cats um, growing up in Chicago, not a lot of opportunity to have an actual horse, but, um, anytime that I was around horses, you know whether it was riding trails or things like that just always happy as a kid. And you know, of course, you know even now as an adult when you drive down the the interstate and you're like, oh, a horse, right. So, um, there was a lot of that in my life, and my husband and I moved to Southwestern North Dakota in 2016. I was working for a big box retailer and we had a. I had a two year contract to be here, so our intention was to move to North Dakota and then go back to Illinois where our family is after that two years and within six months we fell in love with North Dakota and, um, the park and the wild horses that were there.

So when I found out that there were wild horses in the park, you know we immediately had to go and check it out. And, um, then we started learning that they have names and they have families, They've got bands and kind of educating ourselves about the horses. But then you start hearing things like um, you know, they're calling all the babies out of the herd, and so you start asking questions and we're being told you know, we don't question the park by other nonprofits, we don't question the park, the park knows what they're doing. And it just seems kind of common sense to me that if we have mostly older horses in the park, you're taking all the four month old to three year old horses out every year. What's going to happen to this herd?

Right.

Um, so we were questioning that. We were also questioning the use of GONECon, or GONECon birth control. In 2009, the park started, uh, working with Colorado State University and they were literally experimenting on the horses in this park, this new form of birth control. The four year study went on for 11 years and now there's questions on if any of our mayors are permanently sterilized. Um, there was a subset of 24 mayors and when the study ended the experiment ended in 2020, 19 of those 24 mayors had not returned to fertility and they're still using that drug in the park today. So, after working with other, you know, I worked with other nonprofits that you know advocate for the horses and work with the park and you can't continue to to support removing all the horses and this, you know, um really rogue way of of handling birth control, especially when you see that there are other wild horse herds that are responsibly managing their horses, like Acetic. You know Acetic Island was using PCP on their mayors to control the population.

Okay, for for our listeners who aren't familiar, um, if you could just tell us what Acetic I mean. I know what it is, but let's let's talk about how famous they are.

It's another national park. Right.

So it's another national park.

It's located in Maine. Um, there's two different sides. Well, there's the, the Acetic ponies are. There's two different sides One ruled by the national park, one managed by the national park and one by the local fire department. But so it's another national park is is the point of this? So we know that there are wild horses in other national parks. We know that they are managing them responsibly. We know that they manage them as a cultural and historical resource, exactly.

Because, uh, misty of Shinkote, any horse loving kid grew up reading Margaret Henry's books about Misty of Shinkote and Stormy of Shinkote, and I remember seeing the movie, you know, and loving it. Um, now, that is a big, you know, culturally well known Thing, right? So whatever they were doing to preserve them, market them the fire department, the annual roundup, et cetera, um has worked well for them. So they're like a good model, you might say.

Well. So the national park service part is also a good model, because they don't call that herd, they don't want Acity Island wild horses at large in the community, um, and they use PZP as birth control and it had worked so well that they currently are not giving any of their mirrors birth control to get the population numbers up. So if it's working there, there's no reason why we can't model that here in our park. Okay, so, um, so we started asking questions. Um, we have a law firm that we work with, u banks and associates, um, they're great environmental lawyers so we're working with them. We've also been working with American Wild Horse Campaign trying to get answers and trying to get responsible management out of the park.

So the last management plan the park did was in 1978. And it's a Wow, it's a. It's a ridiculous plan that says that they can only have 35 to 60 horses. They've never stuck to that. And, even more importantly, at the time that was done, the department of the Interior sent a BLM rain specialist out to the park to look at what they were proposing for the horses, to see if there were other alternatives, and the guy that they sent out there debunked everything in this 1978 EA, you can handle a lot more than 35 to 60 horses. Yeah, let's talk about that.

How much land? Sorry, there's a cat tail in the shop. There's just under 50,000 acres.

Sorry say that again, just under 50,000 acres of land in the South unit of the park. Okay, so he told normal circumstance for people who aren't familiar with range, land and grasslands.

what can that, you know support without any uh danger to the horses starving things like that? Like what can that normally support, you know, compared to just 30 horses?

So those questions, those are things that, um, I think that we were hoping to get from the park in this management planning process, because there are also. So the park is a beautiful place. Right, it is. It's a it's. It's an just incredible place that has very unique opportunities, where people can see not only bison but you can see horses, you can see deer, you can see pronghorn, you, I mean there's a variety of species in the back, you know the beautiful badlands backdrop in a place where all these things are thriving and have for so long.

So in this 1978 plan where they talked about 35 to 60 horses, this range specialist came in and said you could easily handle a lot more than that. Um, these the soils are nutrient rich, these horses aren't starving. Um, this is some of the best genetically genetic horses I've seen. You know and this was a guy that was going everywhere, so they didn't listen, of course Um, he warned against them introducing new blood and things like that. So they went ahead with their plans to introduce new blood in the 70s and when that was with please, when they introduced the new blood in this in the 80s and 90s.

Okay, and where did?

that come from the new. What were the horses? Were they?

So again it speaks to like the ignorance of the day. They took like local ranch stock and took those horses and threw them in the park. So they took a domesticated horses and threw them into the badlands Like they had a chance of surviving. Well, they didn't.

Um they ended up having. They ended up having to take out dominant studs and mayors because they wouldn't breed with these horses. They wouldn't let them breed. There was one horse I know I read a story about. They put a couple of mayors in a catch pen with him for, you know, a I don't know a period of time, a week or two and as soon as they opened the gate and let them out, the mayors took off running. They wanted nothing to do with this. The stallion, any of the introduced horses that they put in, they had to take out because they couldn't. They couldn't survive, they couldn't get bands and they they decimated this herd in the process. So two brothers, frank and Leo Coons I don't know if you've heard of them they were actually buying the horses from the park before they introduced this new blood because they recognized this was a very unique horse. Um, it is the horses now named the Nicota horse. It's the state's honorary equine.

Why don't you back up and give me a history on the Nicota horse? Then, like, like, like, explain a little bit about um, cause um? Let's just assume my audience, because I don't know a lot of this Um, so my audience probably doesn't either. Let's back up a little bit the cultural heritage of the Nicota horse, why they're important, why we want to preserve them. You know why putting modern cortohorses or something like that is going to dilute it, not be good for it. You know right.

So the importance of protecting it. So Dr Castle McLaughlin was an intern at Theodore Roosevelt National Park in the 80s and she was wondering where did these horses come from? You know what is the history, what is the story of these horses? Because she's seen the park also trying to eradicate them. And, dr McLaughlin, she went on to be a curator at Harvard's Peabody Museum but she was commissioned by the park and to do research on the horses. So she has an over 300 page report and we have it on our website Um, the history of the wild horses in this area.

She talked to people who are no longer around anymore. She worked with Tom Tesher and Leo Coons, um, who both are no longer here, but when she went back and she had all of the park's records she had access. You know she's got a ton of information in this report. Um, there is a very clear path that shows the horses that were in this area when the park was fenced have a direct line to Sitting Bulls, war Ponies. That when he surrendered at Fort Buford, just a, you know, a couple hours away from where the park now sits. You know his horses were sold to the Marquis de Morres who founded the town of Madura. He sold some of his horses to a big rancher in the area, ac Heide Cooper, and those horses were running free in this area In the fifties.

When they realized that they had horses fenced into the park, they called on local ranchers and said hey, this is your last chance. Come and get your horses. We're going to round them up, get them out. And anyone who was a part of that roundup said we took all the horses that had brands on them, right? So the ones that were left were wild, right. So I think that there's also a lot of question about, um, you know, like, at one time they say that this horse herd got down to 16 horses I don't know how much that's true because of the vastness of the land and if they, and if they really did count everything or know what they had, because they didn't even know the horses were there until Tom Tesscher had let them know. So, um, so there's rich history here, rich cultural and historical history. And again, I mean the park memorializes Theodore Roosevelt, who of course, saw horses when he was here and he had a ranch there and probably used some of these horses.

I've been reading a whole bunch of books by Will James you know Will James, a Western author from the 30s and 40s and 20s and of course he talks a lot about Mustangs and how vast the West was and how the ranch horses and the Mustangs were kept on the open range, like they would just go get them when they needed them that day, you know whatever. And so it seems very plausible to me that there was a lot more horses there they couldn't find. You know, like, when they first fenced it in they didn't know where they were because, being wild horses which were pretty difficult to catch, you know, on horseback at the time, they would know where to hide. You know, if someone's coming around, they would know how to get away from that. And so it seems very plausible to me, just from reading that historical record even though it was fiction he was basing it on historical things or real things that was happening at the time that these horses would be there and that they've always been there. And I love the fact that they have even more cultural and historical importance, being from sitting bulls herd and you know others Right.

So they fenced the park in when? When did that happen? In the 1950s, 1950s, okay, and from that point on did people understand there was wild horses there and it was like that was a draw, or did that take a little time to build?

I think that, just from what I can see from historical, you know like the New York Times covered the story on the roundup in the 50s. So I would think that people were aware, and I do know that even in that 1978 document and throughout Castle's report and she had access to all the National Park Service records too In the 1978 report they said we don't ever recommend fully removing the horses, trying to fully remove the horses from the park, because public outcry and local pressure is so great. So it was almost like a warning to the park. You know, like to the future park don't do this. We've been down this road Right. Local pressure is a lot, public outcry is a lot, and here the park is still continuing on this path.

And that's so now. Well, do you? You're younger than me, but I do remember Wild Horse Annie and how she became an advocate for the Mustangs and how public perception of Mustangs changed from we're going to shoot them all and turn them into dog food, cat whatever, right. You know back in that she was really important and others really important in bringing a shedding of light on what was happening and that we needed to preserve them. And then didn't the? Wasn't there a federal act to protect them at some point? But for some reason let me correct me if I'm wrong that the Teddy Roosevelt ones aren't under the same laws the BLM as the wild horses that we know about right now.

Right. So in Castle talks about this in her report. The National Park Service actually went to court to ask to be excluded from the Wild Horse and Burrow Act. So National Parks are in charge of managing the horses on their lands in whatever way they want.

Essentially, Okay, so they.

They just so the shinkotage acetate there's no, there's no protection for wild horses, the wild horses at Cape Lookout National Seashore, which is where, sorry, which is where they're down south.

Okay, but on the east side of this on the east coast, correct? Okay, so the the Shackleford banks. Wild horses there are protected under federal law and that's something that we're trying to get done for the horses here. They found a sympathetic federal delegate who ended up getting these horses protected. It's something that we've been talking to Senator John Hoven about to here and something that he did say that he would be interested in doing for these horses North.

Dakota. He's a North Dakota senator. Okay, yes, okay, great, yeah, you have worked tirelessly. From what I've seen, when I read everyone go to her Facebook page, go to Chris's website, educate yourself about this issue and we'll talk more about what people can actually do now to help. But we'll get to that. But Chris and her group and then other groups as well but Chris's group has worked tirelessly to, it seems to me, to get publicity, which is great, yes, and to get the word out to your legislators who can help this process. And we'll talk more about where you're at right now, although podcast time will pass and hopefully things will turn out, but this is kind of what's happening now, wow, so there's just so much to take in.

So the argument I was trying to, of course, I'm going to advocate personally for seeing the horses because, as like everybody else, I've had personal experience. I was blessed enough to travel twice in 2022 to the park. I'd never been there before, so we went in the spring and we saw the foals and I'm a photographer, so with a nice long lens, not disturbing the herd, but I was able to have that magic, that feeling, that that like right, oh my, you know the fact that like look, we can see them and they're interacting and they're relaxed and we can get these photographs without very important, not disturbing them, right and then to. So the horses were. It was Earthrea. It was fantastic and I can understand, even if you don't like horses, seeing them in their environment. And they look great, I know. But you know they have foals at their side. But the mares were fat and sassy. There's enough to eat even in drought. There's got to be enough. They looked great. Foals look great. And then we saw the bison, of course, and then the calves. I mean often, you know, the normal person like me doesn't get a chance to see bison. I'm in Wisconsin, I mean there's no right, you know not running around anyway. So to see the calves, and you know prairie dogs, okay, we don't have them. So that was a blast. Oh, just like you go around to bend and there'd be something else. It's an amazing park. And then I read a lot about Teddy Roosevelt and read his book about the badlands, about his ranch. He wrote several books. People should check them out, you know. So there's a whole.

I met my husband in Minnesota history class so you have to understand that history is a big deal for me. So it was really great to go and walk where these people walked and then think about the Native Americans that you know that was their land and things. Just, there's so much history, so some people are the. I'm trying to understand the other side, where they go. Well, the horses haven't always been here. Well, neither have any of us, so that means we shouldn't be there either.

You know, and right, it doesn't make sense to me to like, try and make. We're trying to go back to diner start time, where there's nothing. I mean, I mean of course there's animals, but no, you know, then let's get rid of the roads, let's get rid of all the electricity, let's get you know what is. What are you trying to do? How far back do we? Because the horses have been here, been there, since horses have been reintroduced to the United States, right? So the horses have been there. Why? Why aren't the bison treated the same way? Then you know where they. They were always there, right? So?

I'm trying to understand the argument what? What are they?

trying to do so. The horses were fenced into the park, so the horses were here right the park reintroduced bison in the fifties.

Okay, and in the seventies reintroduced the elk.

Okay, but according to the park, the bison are native and the elk are native and the horses are the non native out of the group. It doesn't make sense and, like you're saying, what are we trying? Where are we trying to go back to and how are we defining native? And that's a huge debate. Our attorney general, drew Rigley, said you know, yeah, we could talk about native in terms of, like you're saying, you know, going back, you know, to prehistoric times and when did the horse die out? And all this other stuff. But there isn't anybody currently living in North Dakota that remembers the time that these horses weren't here.

So they're native to this area.

Right. So that's. That's a very big point and a big argument that we continue to make. What the park did was they came out and decided, after years of calling the horses you know, historically significant, a culturally a cultural herd, all of a sudden now they've reclassified them as livestock. We don't believe that the park took the proper steps to classify the horses. They just pulled the name out of the air and found a way around things. So now they're citing all kinds of National Park Service policies that say wild horses aren't allowed on National Park Service lands or livestock are not allowed on National Park Service lands.

So that draws the question for me how come the horses, the ascetic, how you pronounce it, asateeg right, asateeg horses? Okay, the national parks are both national parks, exactly. How does that not apply to them then? And what an outcry you would get. You know, people were to suddenly go. No more misty of Shinkote, why? Why does one park get to do one set of rules, another park get to do another set of rules?

that so so I've been talking to the chief resource manager at Asateeg a lot, because I wonder the same things. Right, this is a national park, you're a national park, you have horses, we have horses, so why are things working there so well and why are they not working so well here? So when all this came up, I sent him an email and I said hey, I'm just wondering, will they be getting rid of the horses at Asateeg, because I've heard livestock aren't allowed on National Park Service lands, so our horses have to go. And he said no, our horses are not in danger of being of leaving, because we see them as a cultural resource. That's how they label them. So as quickly as the park labeled them as livestock, they can change that label, because they didn't do it through any kind of policy means that they should have. If they truly were changing the classification of these horses to livestock, they would have had to have engaged with the public on that and let the public know and let the public weigh in, and that never happened to our knowledge.

Our lawyers have asked yeah, does that benefit you then, in the sense of your argument that they did well our lawyers have.

Our lawyers have asked and we have tried to FOIA for records to show where the classification of these horses came. And since the park refuses to produce that document, I'm guessing it's because it doesn't exist, right? If it existed, you, if you truly reclassified these horses as livestock, you would have documentation to show that. We're asking you for that and you're not giving it. So I'm guessing it doesn't exist. So this is just a ploy from the park, a way that they found to try to get rid of the horses. So they, they, they've decided that they're livestock.

I think that my husband will laugh, because I just say this all the time, I don't know another way to say it Almost anything that we hear from the park, I feel like their responses are equivalent to toilet paper math these days. Right, when you were in, you could do the test of this, right? You used to be able to go to the store and you would buy six rolls of toilet paper and the package would say six rolls of toilet paper. Now it says six equals 18, six equals 12. So you don't understand why the toilet paper companies are trying to make you believe that you're really getting 12 rolls of toilet paper when you're looking at six, but it's the same thing with the park. Why can't the horses stay here? It doesn't matter what they say, it just doesn't make sense.

Well then, how long has this been going about as far as them saying they don't need the horses? Is this a new development? Is it when administration change, or has it been consistent through administrations, or it's been?

consistent through administrations. If you look at Castle's report, I mean there were times that they would try to bait the bait and trap the horses where they would put hay out. They put sexinal chlorine in the hay to try to drug the more dominant stallions so they could try to get them out. The bison ate the hay instead. I mean just the her report is just a whole, a chronological event of just the attempt.

When did she release the report again?

The report was released in the 80s but it goes through the beginning of the park. Like I said, she started from well. She started like long before the park, right.

So it's been documented and you have this. People can access this on your website if they want to learn more. Okay, all right, so it's been a. This hasn't been a huge priority for the federal government to solve this problem.

Well, no, they've been trying to get rid of the horses, right? I mean, that's how they want to solve it, but they haven't been open-minded about.

I mean because you guys have worked tirelessly. It seems that the local community and your state level, you know, notwithstanding all of the people who visit the park, so even just the local people are very much in favor of the horses because a culturally important and b a huge draw. Why would you want to hurt a local economy by such an arbitrary decision? Because I've been to Madura so we can talk about all that so.

So they started this process. So last March, in 2022, is when they started this process and they had what they now call, because they changed things all the time. So it was now a pre-scoping period where they gave us six alternatives to consider. None of them allowed for a genetically viable herd of horses. They supposedly listened to public input and came back in December with three alternatives, with the proposed action being complete elimination of the herd. So their proposed action is to get rid of the horses period. They gave us a no action alternative, which is that 35 to 60 horses from the 1978 management plan, and then the only other alternative they're considering is a, an alternative that gets rid of all of the horses quicker. So we have one way that the horses would all be gone within two years, and then their proposed alternative, which they're saying would mean the horses would be removed over the course of a 10 year period. So when they go back to, so when, when this process and so right now we're in they've released their draft environmental assessment, which a lot of people are upset about, but we've been saying all along when this comes out, we expect this to support their proposed action. Right? They're not going to find some miracle to keep the horses. They want to get rid of them, and that's what the draft environmental assessment does. So what we did find that was really telling and, I would say, shacking. But I don't know that anything shacking anymore is.

There were documents that they cited in the draft environmental assessment and one of them to go back to your tourism question when I was looking through the report with our lawyers, we were kind of talking on the phone and just kind of like skimming through and seeing what was there they made a point to say that they had a study done, a visitor survey done, in 2017 and 2018 and that report was released in 2020. That report stated that only 49% of visitors to the park support the ongoing presence of wild horses in the park. So when you hear that statement, don't you automatically think 51% of people they polled actually said they don't want horses in the park. So our lawyers said you need to get this report. If they cited it in here, they have to make it available to the public.

Okay, so I sent a superintendent an email and they downloaded, I think, about 80 different documents to the website that they're planning website that you can look at. And when you look at this report, because they have to answer, like you said, to the tourism aspect. This is going to have an impact on the local economy and they're trying to use this report to say well, no, because only 49% of people polled even care about the horses being in the park. When you look at the report, there are three different, varying degrees of support strongly support, support and somewhat support and when you add those three up, it's actually 89% of visitors that support the ongoing presence of horses in the park.

Yeah, only 4%. Yes, that's kind of shocked.

Yeah, only 4% opposed the horses being in the park at all. And not only that, but out of 22 scenarios that the park gave and what people wanted to experience in the park, the horses were the number one thing people want to experience.

Exactly, exactly. We went back in the fall and we saw them in the fall. We got even closer and it was even cooler. And I wasn't the only one looking at them. I mean everybody was so excited and children to see them, to understand and to you know, because the park does a good job explaining history, I mean the, the actual people that we met at the park were wonderful as far as people working there, and we're very excited to tell us what we saw. The horses might be over here, they might be over there. You know, they were really great about it. So I'm sure a good number of them like the horses as well. I think this probably comes from higher up. You know so, right, right, and you know so. But so I understand what you're saying. Like, of course, almost 90% of people would be like, yeah, we want the horses there.

Right.

So so the other thing is that in this document dump they did, a document was dumped in.

It's called NPS 2022H and this is a document that's a recap of a meeting that they, the park service, had in October of 2022 so before the Strathe A came out of upper level management people within the park, that there were people that were there in person and people that visited remotely for this meeting. They had their attorney from the Department of the Interior there, so it's letting you know. You know the, the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management all fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, so the Department Interior lawyer was there also giving advice, and this report has since disappeared off the website, but we have it downloaded and you can get it on our website and we encourage everyone to look at it, because if they're hiding this report, then there's something that they don't want you to see and everyone needs to see it. This report is shows how calculated and determined they are to get rid of the horses. They have an answer for everything, anything, okay, so let me stop you there.

What is their motivation to get? Is it, you know? Because? Do they cost more? Does it work? What's the reason? I mean, besides the going back to whatever was the million dollar question.

But so what they're telling the public? And it says in this document they need to connect the dots for the public. So they're trying to let you know we're not smart enough to come to our own conclusions. They're going to let us know why we need to get rid of the horses, and you know we have to follow their dots when you look outside those dots. So they're saying that the horses are not native, of course. So that's one argument. They have to restore their. They're managing for the native prairie ecosystem, which they haven't defined. So we don't know again, is that going back to prehistoric times? Are you talking about the native prairie ecosystem from when the Eurasia vals was here? Um?

yeah, but that see that right on the face of it, that makes no sense, because none of it, the, none of it, the, the, the eco prairie system had horses on it had by right on it had. Right, you know, elk had these things um horses hundreds and hundreds of years now. So it's not like I mean unless they're going back to you know way, way, way back, which means no people, no roads. That, on the face of it, just seems, you know, makes no sense.

They've also said that they are not. They are no longer interested in theater Roosevelt's ranching legacy, they're only interested in his conservation legacy.

Oh, that's interesting. Why, why, where did the what, what, how soon, how long? When did that start?

Because that seems well, that's a good question because a couple years ago they got a five million dollar grant to restore the Peaceful Valley Ranch within the park right To make that into an interpretive center. So if you don't care about the ranching legacy, why did you take that grant to do that?

The timing on that, I mean how long ago? That was within the last couple of years. Right so did the was? When did the shift happen from ranching is not good. I mean, we're not going to talk about it to you know. Restoration of the prairie, which it's not that good.

It's that they're not interested in his ranching legacy, which of course led to his conservation.

Like legacy Right he wouldn't have been the guy he was if he hadn't had the experience out West doing the things he did. So I mean, did that, was that real recent, or was it when? Did that paradigm shift? Where they were Let me get it Correct they weren't interested in the ranching history, only in the conservation history, which are hand in hand.

Correct and in 2014,. They actually have a document it's called the foundation document that talks about the purpose of the park and all of that. The horses are mentioned in there as a cultural resource, as wildlife. They're not referred to as livestock, and to change this foundation document would be a big undertaking. So even in the draft EA they make mention of you know why, why they can go away from the foundation document, which really, again, it's like toilet paper math. It just makes your head hurt when you try to figure out why and what?

Yeah.

So I have another question that out loud, you know yeah, no, people definitely go look at the website, educate yourself, I mean, because then then you can, then you can argue articulately. So my question is then okay, so this is culturally important. This is a Dakota horse. Culturally important, this is history. So let's put, let's put Teddy Roosevelt aside, so we're talking about the people that were there before Teddy Roosevelt. So, culturally important, we are trying as a society to be really aware of all cultures and celebrate all cultures and whatever. Right, be aware of our history.

Why wouldn't that be a hugely important part then? I mean, obviously we want to care about history, we want to, you know, preserve this, because in Minnesota they just recently have come across I want to make sure I get the name right but a jib. They were bred by the jibba, horses bred by the jibba, and they're starting to try to preserve that bloodline, this kind of smaller mustangy type horse, and that's being celebrated here and it's wonderful. And you know, these people are doing their best to preserve that they don't run wild, but they're trying to at least preserve this heritage breed. Now, the Dakota would be maybe it is under the consiverse. You know, there's an animal controversy, can't say what the word conservatory, whatever, of heritage breeds, you know so maybe the Dakota is even listed there, I don't know.

But I'm saying, like, why wouldn't that be a super big, important argument for that keeping them there? As far as the federal government, who's supposed to be sensitive to these cultural issues and should care about them? We, as Americans, all of us, should care about this history. Why isn't that part I mean, I know that's part of your argument and how do the, the native peoples that are interested in this happening? I'm sure you're getting support. How come they're not being heard as well? What's going on there?

Well, so the park service has said that they are meeting with the tribes, they're meeting with our legislators, and all of this, but here's what we can tell you. They did say that when they remove the horses from the park which, by the way, we'll be going back to helicopter roundups, and if the horses don't sell on their government surplus website, where they sell them on, then they will just euthanize the horses. So that's the plan for eliminating the horses, which is just disgusting in itself, if like everything wasn't bad enough.

Let's put some icing on the cake, I feel like. But they said that they would first offer the horses to the tribes. Well, like you said, since this happened on December 12th, when they came out with their announcement of getting rid of the horses, our organization's been pounding the pavement, trying to get support in some any way, shape or form.

December 12th of what year? Sorry, just so you know 2022 December 12th.

Okay, so the first thing we did was we reached out to our state legislators, and North Dakota is unique in that we have part-time politicians that run our state, so they are only in session for 80 days out of every two years and, thankfully, 2023 was a year that they were in session. So they did, we did help them draft a resolution asking the park to keep the horses, and that passed unanimously in the House and Senate in North Dakota.

Well, good on North Dakota.

That's 100% I mean, and that doesn't happen in the state, but it doesn't happen in politics anywhere in our country right now, right when you can get 100% of politicians in an area to agree on anything, and they did. So they sent a resolution to the state, to the park and to the National Park Service in Washington DC and to our federal delegates, asking for help to keep these horses in the park. Our governor came out in January, right before the end of the coming in lightness with the governor is again governor Doug Burgum.

So he came out in support of keeping the horses in the park, told the park we will like pretty much offer the park any resources available within the state of North Dakota to help keep the horses.

You know the park can't say it's a money deal, then like they can't go, like oh, we can't afford it.

Right, you need money, we have money. You need people, we have people. We've got universities. We've got equine programs in the state. We will do whatever we can to help you. After the governor came out with that statement, the United tribes of North Dakota came out and said we stand with Governor Burgum. Okay, keep the horses in the park. And then we also, our organization, also worked with the MHA nation. They came out with their own resolution.

What's the MHA nation?

Sorry, it's one of the tribes in North Dakota Okay that, and they came out with a resolution saying that the horses were culturally and historically significant to their tribe and that they wanted the horses staying in the park, and that again passed unanimously within their tribal council.

Okay so we also worked with the city of Madura, where the park is located. At their city council came out with a resolution asking the park to keep the horses. And then we've also been working with Senator John Hoven and Senator Hoven at the time that all of the starters in December he was on the subcommittee for national parks Okay so he set up a meeting with our governor, our top state legislators, national Park Service Director Sam's and Superintendent Angie Richmond here at theater, was about National Park and had a conversation about you know, what can we do as a state? How do we work together to keep the horses? And I do know the state legislators that I talked to and Senator Hoven's office. I felt like it was a good meeting and that it was constructive that they were being heard. In April of last year, our organization was asked to speak at the Save Our Wild Horses Conference in Washington DC and we spent several days lobbying Congress. We went to over 200 congressional offices.

Wow.

Passing out packets of information to members of Congress, letting them know about our horses here and what was going on and what was being proposed, asking for help in whatever way that they can. And then Senator Hoven also sits on the Appropriations Committee for the Senate which, for everyone who doesn't know this, is the purse strings of the national government right of our federal government. So Senator Hoven put language in the Senate report for the Interior Department's appropriations bill specifically saying we're aware that you're trying to eliminate the wild horses of theater was about National Park this the Senate, is urging the park to keep these horses in the park.

Wow.

And in spite of all of this, that happened on a state and federal level right the park still came out with a draft environmental assessment that supports their claims on why they need to get rid of the horses in the park.

Okay, wow, that's so. Where does it stand? What's? What's the October 30th 2023? Where does this stand right now? So let's talk about that. Where does this stand? And then let's talk a little bit about how people can help. What can we do? What's next?

So as of right now. So on September 25th the park came out with their draft environmental assessment. So that was followed by a 30 day public comment period. We requested, our organization joined, had other organizations sign on with us and we sent a formal request to the park asking that they extend that public comment period so that the public had ample time to make a good, impactful comment and also for time to review the 80 documents that they didn't release until a week after the assessment was given to us.

So Senator Hovind's office also last week sent a letter to National Park Service Director Sam's asking him for an extension in the comment period. So we were granted a 30 day extension. So the comment period now ends on November 24th. Okay, so we need everyone to comment to the park, but your comment has to have some substance behind it. There's a lot of people. So what I told people initially when all this first hit I understand you're mad, right, we're mad, we're upset, we're pissed off too. Write your letter, right. Write your letter. Use every swear word that you have to put all of your emotion into it and then rip that up and get ready to write something constructive that's going to help these horses and that has to be factual, that talks about the economic aspect, the cultural aspect Are there?

guidelines on your website. So for a person who wants to do this, commenting yes.

We have talking points on our website, Excellent. We have a ton of documents that you can use for scientific, historical, cultural I mean any of those things. All that information on our website for you to use. You can download these documents and read them for yourself, Okay, what has been the response?

Have people been commenting?

Well, we don't have a way to tell and this is something that I asked the park last week. When the BLM does a public comment period like this, I think that you can generally see how many people have commented. We just know from their civic engagement meeting they had a few weeks ago that up until that time about 2,000 people had commented. Already In the last public comment period, over just under 20,000 people commented and we know from their they do a report afterwards that lets you know what people had said. We know from their report only 45 people out of those 20,000 supported the park's decision and they still came back with this environmental assessment.

Reading the way that it does the environmental assessment, when you read it is very like when you read through it. It seems damning, I guess. But when you start poking holes into things that they're saying, like the Brownlee study that we talked about and the only 49% of visitors wanting the horses, those are things that need to be called out to them when you're writing your comment letter to debunk what they're saying. Our lawyers are personally writing our comment letter and that's so that we make sure that our eyes are dotted and our teeth are crossed, because our organization is prepared to take this as far as we need to. I will also say, too, we're very happy that American Wild Horse Campaign is signing on our comment letter with us, so they'll be helping with the legal fees associated with paying that and they're willing to go the distance with us too to fight for these horses to stay where they are.

So what would be your recommendation? Somebody's heard this podcast. What would be next steps for them? So there's two things, two things.

One is go to our website. I've been doing blog posts kind of dissecting different parts, so if you want to talk to the historical part, here's some talking points that you need to talk about. Here's some references that you can use.

We have all the different policies that they cite in there listed on our website too, so you can look at them in their full context, not in the pieces and parts that they're giving us, so you can see the whole scope of what it actually says. So making sure that people comment, and just giving people to make sure that they comment, is the big thing. The second thing and this we happened upon a couple weeks ago we're trying to figure out our organization is trying to figure out how do we get these horses to be labeled culturally and historically significant.

So, I reached out to our state historic preservation office and found out that there's actually a section 106 review process. There's a natural historic preservation act in section 106 talks about the preservation of cultural and historical significance. Hold on a second Sorry, excuse me, physically and historically significant. And people places things. I guess Normally animals are not a part of this, I've heard. But my question was how do we get these horses to be seen as culturally and historically significant? Well, the State Historic Preservation Office is actually now in the process of reviewing that process. So when a federal agency like the park proposes an action like this, the section 106 review process kicks in immediately. So this is out of the hands of the park. This is being done by the North Dakota State Historic Preservation Officer.

And he is reviewing.

he's reviewing the material that they've given and why the horses are not historically or culturally significant, and also looking at are they historically and culturally significant? And the key is, the public can weigh in on this. So public comment matters to the State Historic Preservation Office.

So we have on our website too, people can go on, we have it on our website so you can either send your own letter to the State Historic Preservation Officer or, to make it easier, we have created a petition so people can sign on to the petition and we've gotten, I think, just under 2,500 names on that petition so that we can present that we need to get some more.

So there you go. Well, this sounds like you've worked tirelessly and the people you work with have worked tirelessly, and your public officials and the communities, all these people pulling for the horses. So after November, the commenting section is done, or what happens after that.

So when the comment period is over, then the park will review all the comments that were given in all the comments and all of the supporting documentation that was given to them. I would imagine that sometime over the next few months they'll give us another report, like they've done in the past with the last two comment periods, letting us know how many people commented and what those comments looked like, and then they will come back either. So this is a NEPA process. They're involved in National Environmental Policy Act and so, according to the NEPA process, nepa requires them to look at will there be any significant impacts on the action that they're proposing whether it's scientific, historical, cultural, economically.

So they're supposed to be looking at that and what the park is saying. No, there'll be little to no economic impact. There won't be any impact on anything for taking 200 horses out of the park right, not even scientifically.

A big draw for the park too economically for the park and the surrounding area Right?

So they're saying that there won't be, and so what we're expecting that they would do then is come back with it's called a finding of no significant impact, so they would say there's no impact on the decision that we're making, so we're going to move forward with our plans to remove the horses. So this is the last public comment period. What our organization believes and I think everybody else under the sun believes that they should do, is actually environmental impact statement, which would mean that they would have to take a harder and closer look at the decision that they're making, which would then start a whole public process, a public comment process again, where they would go into a scoping period and then they would have to really spend a lot more time digging in deep on the impacts of what they're proposing, and that's what we're hoping In your perfect world.

okay, what would be the outcome? What are we shooting for here? What's the best possible outcome that we can strive for? Work together?

The biggest thing is to get everybody to comment, and we're hoping that the park I mean the park is engaged in a process and this is why people ask us all the time like why are your lawyers doing this? Why is in Congress doing that? Why isn't Senator Hovan doing something now? They have to finish this process. They can't just I mean I suppose they could stop if they wanted to, but I mean they're engaged in a process. They have to finish and see it through.

So we're hoping that when they come back with the results of this, that they say, hey, we need to do an environmental impact statement. They've already told us repeatedly that they think this environmental assessment is good enough. What they've done is enough research and it's good enough. So then what'll happen is, if they decide to stay the course and do the finding of no significant impact, we will talk to our attorneys and see what their legal advice is for us at that time. People have to understand any legal process that we engage in is going to cost a lot of money and we are not in the application.

Right, I was gonna ask you about that, I was gonna ask you about that. So not only the petitions, but how can we donate, how can we help? I know you're a nonprofit, which is great, but Right.

there's a number of ways you could donate on our website from PayPal, through social media, facebook. We're gonna be doing a silent auction in November to help raise money too, so people can either participate in the auction, they can donate items for the auction, and all that's on our website too, so any of those things will help. The big thing is, yes, it takes money and nonprofits and we're included. We need money to keep going on. We've been doing some social media ads with some videos that some friends that we have at National Geographic have put together for us, and that's generating a lot more interest and a lot of public outcry, so we're glad that that's happening.

I mean we're literally I keep saying that, we're advocating from every angle that we can think of, and if we even made a blog post the other day and said, hey, let's brainstorm, what aren't we doing, what should we do that you can see, and asking our followers that and truly trying to get that engaged with us.

This information will be in the links for the podcast, but let's say it out loud too what is the website that they should go to?

wwwchwaorg.

Okay, why don't we do one more time? Just repeat it one more time wwwchwaorg.

It's Chasing Horses, wild Horse Advocates. We do blogs almost every day where we're giving you some kind of other information or you know people-.

No, you are working super hard. I mean, there's just no doubt about it. You and the people helping you are working super hard. And, boy, I tell you, if I was a horse at Teddy Roosevelt, I'd be grateful that you were fighting for me, because you're pretty fierce, chris, and it's pretty wonderful.

We're grateful for you. Yeah, we'll have all these links and all this information. I encourage everyone to go to the website to donate, to do what they can and educate yourselves. It's not that hard to write the letter. It doesn't have to be paragraphs and paragraphs, it just has to sound like it didn't come from a robocall. It has to sound like it's you and I bet you're all. If you care about these horses at all, I bet you're capable of at least doing that. This is a chance for people to do their best to help move government. I mean, how often do we get that chance? And it's such an important, important, important thing. Wow, this is Chris. I tell you I am gonna. I can't wait to get back to the park. Start right there. I really want to see the horses again and thank you again for this.

Now we're to the section of the podcast. Warren, if you would go grab. We're to section of the podcast. We call the cake break or pie time or whatever, and if you were here if you were here we would be partaking of some yummy snack together. This marks, course, sort of wrapping up the podcast, because this has been incredibly informative and interesting and we haven't talked about you yourself all that much, because I know you're not thinking this is about you, this is about the horses, but we still want to know about you. So let me just see if I can get that to the camera. See, it's a little caramel apple cake, very, very good, gotta feed my crew and we'll send it to you vicariously.

But when I was setting up the interview, I sent you a series of questions, and what these questions are we have stolen from Warwick Schiller, who's a famous horse trainer, and he stole this idea from, or borrowed this idea from, tim Ferriss's book Tribe of Mentors. But it's a series of five questions that will help us understand a little bit more about you, and they're kind of fun to ask. So I sent you 20 questions and you picked out the five questions that we're gonna ask. Okay, okay, and then we can do that. So if you could send a message to the world, what would that be? Or do you have a favorite quote, and why?

I think I said my favorite quote is Margaret Mead never doubt that a group of concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed, that's all that ever has. And we're changing things and that's a big thing that I have a hard time talking about me, because I tell our followers all the time. I could call our state legislators, I could call Senator Hoven's office, they are not gonna care. It's the voice and the strength of our voice that comes from all of us together saying the same thing and bringing that voice up and bringing the volume of that voice up and making it loud so people can change things. This is our. The big thing is this is our national park. It's paid for by tax payer dollars and we absolutely have a right to say what happens here.

For sure. What is the most valuable thing that you've put your time into that has changed the course of your life?

These horses honestly these horses have. They've really changed my life. My husband and I started, you know, when we fell in love with North Dakota and fell in love with the park, started just photographing the horses in the park and we started a Facebook page just as a way to have some within to do with our pictures that we were taking and let our friends and family back home in Illinois you know understand why we're still in North Dakota or what we're doing here, and that grew into a small business. We've got a business right down the street from the park in Madura.

Yeah, why don't you? What's the name of the? What's the name of the business?

Our store is called Chasing Horses.

And it actually comes from, yes, wwwchasinghorsescom, and the name actually comes from my mom. At the time was still living in Illinois and anytime she would call me, it would be on my days off and she'd say what are you doing? And I'd say, well, we're in the park. And she said, well, is that all you do in North Dakota? You just chase horses now? And so it kind of stuck. So when it came time to pick a business name, I thought you know, that's what we do, right, we're chasing horses and it is you know, learning about them and trying to find them in the park at different times. And then, as the park continued with their calling practices and removing all the babies, four months old to the three years old our followers on the page were saying what do we do? What do we do? What do we do? And none of the other organizations were challenging the park or trying to get them to stop. That's when our nonprofit was born.

So truly these horses.

That was our nonprofit. Started in 2021.

Wow okay. So you've been at this, I mean prior, but then the number as well.

Right, we were advocating before we were a formal nonprofit group. So I would say that Because it wasn't about.

It was about the horses. Okay, all right, this is a good question for you, because you seem to work really hard at all the things you do. Where do you go or what do you do to recharge your batteries?

I go to the park to see the horses. I can say that this year has been really hard, because it's hard.

Well, this is something so important and you believe so much in it, and that's okay, it's our future.

This is our history, it's our future. I say all the time, my grandkids deserve to walk into that park at any time in their lives, the same way that we can right now, and see these horses From December 12th. You know like I kept thinking that, all right, when the public comment period's over, my life is gonna go back to normal and I can, you know, do something else. And it's just been, you know, getting ready for the conference in Washington DC, getting packets together for Congress, talking to the press. I mean, that's something we didn't talk about either when the press, when the park first made their announcement. My husband and I are watching the news and nobody's talking about this.

And we waited another day and nobody's talking about this on the news, like the park just put out a press release saying we're getting rid of the horses.

And the next day I called every station in North Dakota and said are you aware that the park just announced they're getting rid of the horses? And then all of a sudden it was hey, can you come into the studio and talk to us and explain what's going on? So we've had a constant, constant interactions with the press, also making sure that they're informed that they're covering the story, that they're staying engaged and I can say that there was a day in April where the horses had moved to like where they go in the spring and the summer and it's one of my favorite places to see the horses because you have just the backdrop of the beautiful buttes in the area and my husband and I just took a day and went out to the park and there were probably about 10 or 12 bands we're talking over 100 horses in this area and when I got there it was like this is what we're fighting for.

This is exactly what we're fighting for. I had advocate friends. We held a rally over the summer and we had advocates come from all across the United States and I had advocate friends from American Wild Horse Campaign and in defense of animals who have seen wild horses on the Western range in various places, who have said this is different, this is very different, this is very special. So it's worth fighting for. If these horses are removed from this park, they will never be returned. They'll be gone forever.

That would be wrong. I'm really hoping and praying for a really good outcome and I encourage again everyone listening or watching this podcast.

It's not too late, even in those little time of the matter, we're still fighting with everything we can.

For sure, for sure. Ok, what inspires and motivates you to do what you do? What is your true purpose in the world?

That I don't know. Well, I mean I'm enjoying advocating. I mean I've enjoyed. This has been a very I am very thankful to people who tell me all the time that I seem very well organized and I seem like I know what I'm doing. And this seems like it comes natural Because there's struggles. I mean it's been a very hard learning curve. I knew my knowledge of the NEPA process before last March was pretty much zero. So that whole learning curve to understand what we're doing, what's happening, why are they doing this, you know, like, where do we go from here? What is this now? What is that now? It's been a huge learning curve that's really consumed everything, because I feel like there's no way for me to step away now. I can't just say, eh, I decided I didn't want to do this anymore. I mean the fight has to continue.

Yeah, and it seems ongoing. It is ongoing. You might get these small victories, but you have to keep going.

But then the other thing that's happening. What I'm really hoping is that advocates are watching what's happening here, because we are having successes where other people aren't. We have the North Dakota Stockman's Association advocating with us for keeping these horses. That doesn't happen in wild horse advocacy.

No. I mean that's a traditionally goes way, way back to a conflict of interest between cattle on the range and horses on the range.

So now we're having other smaller groups saying, hey, how can I do what you did here? What can I do? And so. I'm very welcome to share any of that information with anybody, and if anything that we're doing here will help wild horse advocates anywhere else. I don't have any secrets. I'll tell you what we did. To me I don't feel like we did anything really spectacular.

We just had a lot of work. Your work and people helping you is transcending. Transcending just your little local issue, what's important, but setting the bar, transcending so that people can do more for more horses across the country. That's fantastic.

And that's what we're hoping.

Yeah, that's great. Ok, this is a little bit easier question Do you have a favorite animal companion?

So right now I could say that my animal companion. Last year we got a puppy that happened into our life and he's a German shepherd. German shepherd Akita mixed. He's probably about a 75 pound one year old baby that I have.

He is. He reminds me every morning. We take a walk every morning for about an hour or so and watch the sunrise, and that's because of him. So he reminds me to take time for myself, enjoy the sunrise. He makes me laugh and he's a constant companion. If I let him be in here, he would be sitting at my feet right now. When I'm downstairs working on my computer. He's laying under my desk, so yeah, he's my companion. Now I also have a seven year old dog named Rocky. He's a little Jack Russell.

Beagle, you're a brave woman, the Dakita and a Jack Russell.

Yeah, so the two of them. When our weather's not so bad, the Jack Russell goes out walking with us two in the morning and the two of them are just great. And to me it's my way to take some part of my day for myself before I give it to everybody else.

Well, you need that balance and I'm sure you still?

don't take enough time. I'm sure you work tirelessly Well, I tell you I'm grateful for your efforts. I know that if the horses could speak and understand, they would be grateful for your efforts. I'm going to encourage everyone to act. Time is short. We need to act now, right? That's going to be the goal here, and so, on behalf of the horses, on behalf of my listeners, on behalf of anybody watching, chris, we are grateful to you. We're grateful to your husband, because I'm sure he's a big part of your support system there.

And so shout out, shout out to husbands and again thank you for everything, and we'll have all the information listed so people can click right on the links and we'll put up your website so that people can see and all these pieces and things like that. So I want to thank you for being on the podcast and appreciate again all the hard work you're doing.

Thank you, I appreciate the time.