Cross-posted from Washington Post via the Associated Press
'This court is really not in a position to be the overseer of the BLM' states Judge Howard McKibben as he refuses to help the Mustang.
-
RENO, Nev. — (Jan. 27 2012) A federal judge in Nevada who handed horse protection advocates a rare victory last fall has rejected their latest request to block government roundups of free-roaming mustangs in the West, saying they’ll have to go to Congress if they think the animals are being treated inhumanely and need more protection.
U.S. District Judge Howard McKibben granted a temporary restraining order on Aug. 30 that cut short by a day a roundup near the Nevada-Utah line after he determined a helicopter flew too close to a horse in violation of the law.
But he said during a hearing in Reno Thursday that he was denying a new injunction request from the Texas-based Wild Horse Freedom Federation partly because the Bureau of Land Management has made some positive changes since then. He also said he can’t issue injunctions based on speculation about future abuses.
In the AP article McKibben is quoted as saying,
“This court is really not in a position to be the overseer of the BLM,” McKibben said. “This court is not going to police all gathers in the U.S. or even all gathers in the district of northern Nevada.”
“This Court is not Congress, not an administrative agency. We are not the first branch of government. We are not the second branch. We’re here to consider grievances,” he said.
Am I wrong in thinking that other advocates have been successful in the Courts for the protection of wildlife and natural preserves? If I am right, why do our wild horses always seem to be the exception to every rule when it comes to their protection and preservation?
