Continuing from the previous conversation, Wild Horse Fire Brigade’s Bill Simpson responds to Jackson County Commissioner Colleen Roberts.
From: Colleen Roberts <RobertCL@jacksoncounty.org>
To: ‘Bill Simpson’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thu, Jun 27, 2019 12:13 pm
Subject: Wild Horse Fire Brigade
Great job on the radio this morning. This morning our Board discussed a letter in support to our Legislators requesting a large scale test plan for the Natural Wildfire Abatement and Forest Protection Plan for the DOI. I would certainly be open to your recommendation for the letter and who you recommend sending it to. I will be speaking with Congressman Walden tomorrow, and will mention it as well.
Jackson County Commissioner
From: Bill Simpson <email@example.com>
To: AttorneyGeneral <AttorneyGeneral@doj.ca.gov>; Carissa.Bunge <Carissa.Bunge@mail.house.gov>; riley.bushue <firstname.lastname@example.org>; sen.michaeldembrow <email@example.com>; sen.ginnyburdick <firstname.lastname@example.org>; sen.DennisLinthicum <sen.DennisLinthicum@oregonlegislature.gov>; sen.dennislinthicum <email@example.com>; eleanor.blume <firstname.lastname@example.org>; ben_ward <email@example.com, plus several redacted personal emails
Sent: Mon, Dec 2, 2019 10:18 pm
Subject: Wild Horse Fire Brigade
Question: What good are elected officials who make promises like the one below from Commissioner Colleen Roberts (btw: sent on the very day that would have been Laura's and my 47th anniversary) and then fail to do what was so easy?
Now Colleen Roberts is obfuscating as to why they didn't write the letter (that's right; it's now 5-months since that promise and the letter was never written).
What I find fascinating is: the email herein below from Commissioner Roberts came a couple days before Roberts went to D.C. and spoke with the DOI... then she returns home with their Forest (burn and cut) management agenda, and made no further mention of WHFB or writing the letter asking local legislators for a bill...
Worse yet, it seems Roberts (like many others) may have swallowed the DOI/BLM falsified science, and cherry-picked law, allegedly suggesting that it is illegal to release wild horses onto lands in the State of Oregon (or CA), which is not true. And even more importantly, the release of wild horses into appropriate remote wilderness areas will, without any doubt, reduce both the frequency and intensity of wildfires (according to the best science from Oregon State University and elsewhere)... which is what is needed... so any roadblocks to getting that mission accomplished must be removed, and it's insane to hide behind any such roadblocks when Americans are being made ill by the thousands, and hundreds dying annually as a result of annual wildfires.
Since when do people at the DOI get to override the 9th Circuit Court and micro-manage things in our local counties and states? Are we now ruled by agency fiefdom lords who are clearly beholden to special large economic interests, regardless of how many Americans are made ill by toxic wildfire smoke and devastated by catastrophic wildfires every year now.
*Under the opinion of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (has jurisdiction in OR & CA, and beyond), wild horses are; 'wildlife' and a 'native species'. And this means, that state's Fish and Wildlife agencies can release and manage wild horses on ANY lands in the State, just as they do with deer.. Further reading on this herein below:
Capt. William E. Simpson II - USMM Ret.
Naturalist - Rancher
Creator: Wild Horse Fire Brigade (www.WHFB.us)
*There is money already set aside for re-wilding wild horses into the 3 test areas ('Wilderness Areas') proposed in the Wild Horse Fire Brigade Plan (www.WHFB.us) under the Pittman-Roberson Act .
And given that the 9th Circuit Court has already opined (regardless what some BLM people obtusely think or say) that wild horses are 'wildlife' and a 'native species' ... the funding under the Pittman-Roberson Act is appropriate...
 The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California recognized wild horses as native species, explaining that BLM “establishes Appropriate Management Levels (“AMLs”) for populations of native species – including wild horses, burros, and other wildlife – and introduced animals, such as livestock.” In Defense of Animals, et al. v. U.S. Dept. Interior, et al., No. 12-17804, *6 (9th Cir. May 12, 2014). On Sep 28, 2011 (See Craters AR at 16698. Memorandum Decision & Order) the court addressed “sensitive” species pursuant to BLM’s 2001 Special Status Species Policy.
This Policy requires that “sensitive” species be afforded, at a minimum, the same protections as candidate species for listing under the ESA. It called on BLM managers to “obtain and use the best available information deemed necessary to evaluate the status of special status species in areas affected by land use plans …” See Policy at § 6840.22A. Under the Policy, those land use plans “shall be sufficiently detailed to identify and resolve significant land use conflicts with special status species without deferring conflict resolution to implementation-level planning.”