Committee advances bill to manage free-roaming horses; opponents warn of eradication risk

Representative McQueen presented House Bill 284 to the Senate conservation committee as a three-part approach to address overpopulation of free-roaming horses: adoption/relocation pathways, a formal fertility-control program and a prohibition on slaughter for horses enrolled in the program. "This bill essentially does three things, to help us with our overpopulation and free roaming horses," McQueen said.

Local residents and county officials told the committee of recurring public-safety incidents and landscape impacts. Susan Harrelson, representing Coronado Soil and Water Conservation District, said local herds had grown despite previous contraception efforts and were damaging rangeland and wildlife habitat. "Right now, there's not enough grass to feed the 80 horses that we have," Harrelson said. Sandoval County Commissioner Catherine Brook and other speakers described vehicle collisions and safety risks; Mike Neese said records obtained via IPRA show more than 30 horses killed on local roads in 13 years.

Several animal-welfare organizations, including the ASPCA and representatives of Pueblo of Pojoaque, supported the bill as a humane, managed approach. The New Mexico Livestock Board reported a neutral position but signaled support for measures that assist with overpopulation in specific areas. Opponents warned the bill lacked safeguards to preserve truly wild herds. Sharana (Lehi) of the American Wild Horse Campaign said the measure "gives the New Mexico Livestock Board the ability to find rules" and contains no provision requiring preservation of free-roaming wild horses; she said "it will allow for the removal of all wild horses."

Several technical issues were debated at length: whether fertility control (principally PZP—porcine zona pellucida vaccine administered by darting) is effective, whether counties would bear the cost of nonsurgical contraception, and whether the proposed free-roaming-horse expert could reliably distinguish domesticated stray horses from long-established free-roaming herds. Senators asked how transport, adoption and long-term sanctuary care would be verified; McQueen said horses taken for adoption would be microchipped or freeze-branded and that slaughter would be expressly prohibited for horses processed under the bill.

Committee members also discussed limits on gathering methods (the bill prohibits capture by aircraft or motorized vehicle because of stress on animals) and the definition of "free roaming horse" versus "astray." Witnesses said adoption and relocation capacity is a limiting factor and that pilot fertility-control programs have stabilised populations in some areas.

Senator Hamblin moved a do-pass recommendation; a second was recorded. The committee subsequently voted to advance the bill. The committee recorded a due-pass recommendation: "By a vote of 5 in the affirmative, 2 in the negative, 2 excused, you have a do pass," the transcript records.

Ending: The bill was advanced out of committee with divided support. Sponsors and many local officials urged the next steps focus on funding for monitoring, clear definitions to distinguish stray and free-roaming animals, and mechanisms to ensure humane handling and sufficient adoption or relocation capacity.