Hello, and welcome to the third article in our series over the Trojan War on Horses. If you are not caught up on the series yet the other articles can be foundHERE.Previously, we have discussed the BLM’s failed feral horse management, Laura Leigh, and Wild Horse Education’s counterproductive ‘protection’ of horses. Today, we will take a moment to compare Leigh to the people that she is so quick to accuse of immorality and let our readers decide whotruly cares for animals.
Constantly a target or Leigh’s negative propaganda and attacks is rancher Kevin Borba. Why? Because he stood up for the food producers in his area after the BLM decided it was within their rights to take away his permitted land and destroy his family’s livelihood. His herd of cattle was cut from over 500 head to a mere 100, and the horse problem in his home state of Nevada is so bad that he will most likely have to sell the few cattle that he has left. Watch this video and get a better understanding of his story:Why were so many horses released onto HIS permitted land despite the small AML? What did Borba do to deserve being targeted by Leigh and the BLM?The first question was answered in the video; the judge said they could, so they did. There is no more room in sanctuaries because of the sheer number of feral horses. The second question, however, is more political.Despite the idea of American freedom and the First Amendment, Borba is being punished for speaking out against this government overreach and bad policy. Groups like ‘Wild Horse Education’ are targeting him for fighting back when his land was taken away. If Laura Leigh got her way then all public land would be dedicated to wild horses, we would have no contact with them at all, and the horses could be free to exercise their right to starve and dehydrate to death without our interference.To push her belief of no interaction, Leigh has started a propaganda campaign to ‘educate’ the public on how ‘well off’ wild horses are. She has used photographsclaimingthe pictured showed a “wild horse [that] was actually in extremely poor condition per release and his condition has markedly improved since his return.” An objective remark without proof and solely used to prey on the emotions of her limited readers. Then, she justifies the poor health of the horses she ‘cares so much for’ by saying that it is expected because they are wild. Even touting the injuries she has seen anddone nothing to helpsaying, “I have seen broken legs … and wounds that would have any domestic in critical care.”Yet, when ranchers like Kevin Borba go out of their way to bring water to the horses she demands legal action for their breaking of her and the state’s hands-off code. She shows a rather impressive misunderstanding of true compassion for animals; in barren lands with little to no clean water and hundreds of dehydrated horses, someone needs to do something. When the ranchers were kicked off of their permitted land, they were no longer there to pump water for the wildlife. The ranchers own the water rights and built the water sources, without them there was no working water sources for miles on end.Leaving those horses to suffer is the only crime we see here.One of the many tools in her toolbox of misinformation is using the poster-horse that she named Sarge to raise money. Sadly, she fails to actually ensure care for the horse and since it was released on the range after her photoshoot its condition rapidly deteriorated. Watch this video that shows Sarge’s current condition, and pay attention to who is taking care of it now.Borba is willing to risk his freedom to care for the horses. Why? Because it’s the right thing to do. Laura Leigh is just willing to sit back and rake in money through false information from people who want to help the horses. We need to stop her and others from preying on these suffering animals like Sarge. We need more people willing to care for these animals. We need more people like Kevin Borba.It is a Trojan War, and Sarge was forced to play the part of the wooden horse. Activists are disguising their attacks on the animals as compassion for the majestic creatures when in reality activists don’t really care what happens to them. They are making unfounded and purely emotional arguments based on outright lies, not using logic or reason. They don’t care about the outcome or the animals, only that the activists have money in their pockets. This. Is. Wrong.
Let’s have a discussion about morality, what it means to be right or wrong. We all know our own definitions of ethics, we have a moral compass instilled in us from birth and passed down generation to generation. There are many different measures, given to us by religion, logical reasoning, and philosophers. But, when asked the question of “should we let hundreds of horses starve instead of appropriately managing the land?” the answer is always the same: NO. Whatever form of ethical reasoning a person uses, they do not want to see the animals starve. That is, except for animal rights extremists who stand to gain financially if they do.So, who do you think is more ethical; the animal rights activist gone rogue who is using horses and then letting them suffer, or the compassionate rancher who goes out of his way to care for wild animals despite no possibility of personal gain and threat of legal action? For more information on the various solutions to the horse crisis problem, we encourage you to stay on the lookout for the final part of this series later in the week.