Could feral horses be moved to Alaska?

[Techno-Druid]

With evidence indicating that large grazers help us by indirectly keeping the Permafrost colder, wouldn't it be logical to attempt a mass relocation of mustang horses to Alaska and maybe parts of Northern Canada? It seems like a more viable solution to the 'wild horse's problem that also benefits us and the environment.

Alternatively, we could import Yakutian horses or the wild Pzrewalski's horse instead, but it seems like it would at least be worth a try.

[Jaransan]

I feel like the problem with that is, Canada and America would have to agree on it. Since I doubt anyone involved is going to sit at the border between alaska and canada to make sure a US decision to randomly introduce a new species to an environment doesnt backfire or cause other problems.

Also, if you say theres a wild horse problem, and specifically qualify it as a problem, your basically saying 'lets airdrop this problem in canada'

Plus, pretty much every story Ive ever heard that pertains to moving a species to benefit humans of the time ends with 'Wow we fucked up, its an invasive species now'

[Techno-Druid]

I feel like the problem with that is, Canada and America would have to agree on it. Since I doubt anyone involved is going to sit at the border between alaska and canada to make sure a US decision to randomly introduce a new species to an environment doesnt backfire or cause other problems.

Also, if you say theres a wild horse problem, and specifically qualify it as a problem, your basically saying 'lets airdrop this problem in canada'

Plus, pretty much every story Ive ever heard that pertains to moving a species to benefit humans of the time ends with 'Wow we fucked up, its an invasive species now'

The whole point is that these horses would benefit the ecosystem in the Sub-Arctic. The idea is to reintroduce species like horses, bison, camelids, muskox, reindeer/caribou to convert the tundra and boreal forest into rich grassland/steppe, with that actually showing to decrease the rate of thawing in the Permafrost, which contains more greenhouse gases than which are currently in the atmosphere.

[Fizrazz]

The whole point is that these horses would benefit the ecosystem in the Sub-Arctic. The idea is to reintroduce species like horses, bison, camelids, muskox, reindeer/caribou to convert the tundra and boreal forest into rich grassland/steppe, with that actually showing to decrease the rate of thawing in the Permafrost, which contains more greenhouse gases than which are currently in the atmosphere.

The problem is you'd be basically introducing an invasive species (if these horses aren't already native) to Alaska, throwing off the ecosystem that currently exists there. I mean it's a nice idea reducing carbon emissions and whatnot, but a mass introduction of any horses (invasive or not) could lead to over grazing and potentially cause harm to other species currently living there. You could end up wiping out species that already live there, or changing the landscape (which you seem to want to do). By converting the landscape from tundra to boreal forest you would be destroying the habitat of all the animals that have adapted to the Tundra and fill specific niches.

[Techno-Druid]

The problem is you'd be basically introducing an invasive species (if these horses aren't already native) to Alaska, throwing off the ecosystem that currently exists there. I mean it's a nice idea reducing carbon emissions and whatnot, but a mass introduction of any horses (invasive or not) could lead to over grazing and potentially cause harm to other species currently living there. You could end up wiping out species that already live there, or changing the landscape (which you seem to want to do). By converting the landscape from tundra to boreal forest you would be destroying the habitat of all the animals that have adapted to the Tundra and fill specific niches.

The horses would serve as an ecological proxy for the extinct horse species in Alaska 10,000 years ago that likely were driven to extinction through direct and indirect human means (i.e. overhunting).

The whole point is to allow for horses, bison, muskox, reindeer, etc to graze the land and perform other natural functions to support the growth of grass, which would benefit other species and the Earth as a whole. The issue with mustangs in the lower 49 isn't that they're neccesarily environmentally detrimental, it's that they have been forced to occupy relatively small stretches of land and with of their potential predators being eradicated by ranchers, the outcome is overgrazing.

This would be a non-issue in the northernmost US and Canada because you still have wolves, cougars and brown bears, all of which target foals or adults. Horses even evolved to buck as an evolutionary defense against large cats like cougars and lions (which were once common throughout the Northern Hemisphere) attacking them from behind.

[Lynarii]

The horses would serve as an ecological proxy for the extinct horse species in Alaska 10,000 years ago that likely were driven to extinction through direct and indirect human means (i.e. overhunting).

The whole point is to allow for horses, bison, muskox, reindeer, etc to graze the land and perform other natural functions to support the growth of grass, which would benefit other species and the Earth as a whole. The issue with mustangs in the lower 49 isn't that they're neccesarily environmentally detrimental, it's that they have been forced to occupy relatively small stretches of land and with of their potential predators being eradicated by ranchers, the outcome is overgrazing.

This would be a non-issue in the northernmost US and Canada because you still have wolves, cougars and brown bears, all of which target foals or adults. Horses even evolved to buck as an evolutionary defense against large cats like cougars and lions (which were once common throughout the Northern Hemisphere) attacking them from behind.

The sub-arctic doesn't need an ecological proxy for a species that died out 10000 years ago, the ecology has moved on since then. Introducing a bunch of new animals to the area isn't going to suddenly create more food for grazers to eat, it just means that either the new horses will starve and die, or they'll push out the native species and upset the current balance.

[Machismo]

That's a rough climate, so that is in itself rather problematic. I think the biggest concern for wild horses is that they are feeding on lands that cattle grazers want to use on the cheap, and the horses aren't a real threat other than that. Moving them 1500+ miles to the north would be very costly, and most would probably not survive. Sure, the high desert areas where they tend to live gets damn cold, but you are talking a shift in temperature of another 20-30 degrees.

Now, it does make more sense to move herds to areas with increased fire danger... but in California, they are already there. It's largely inhospitable land that other species have moved away from.

[Techno-Druid]

The sub-arctic doesn't need an ecological proxy for a species that died out 10000 years ago, the ecology has moved on since then. Introducing a bunch of new animals to the area isn't going to suddenly create more food for grazers to eat, it just means that either the new horses will starve and die, or they'll push out the native species and upset the current balance.

Did you even read what I posted? The problem with the horses in the deserts and Great Plains region in the US is that they're pushed off land and forced to occupy smaller areas with less mobility and exterminated predators.

Horses are not stationary, they are constantly moving in large herds. In Alaska and the regions (in both the Americas and Eurasia) I was referring to, this lack of space and predators wouldn't be an issue.

And yes, they would create more grassland, that's the entire point. The entire region was once a megafauna ecosystem, meaning it was engineered by megafauna through their ecological functions, no different from the large grazers and browsers in Africa and the Indian Subcontinent. The grazers fertilize grass, dimish the overspreading of bushes and shrubs which choke the growth of grass among many other things.

10,000 is not even a blink in the eye for evolution. It'll take 5-7 million years alone just to undo the ecological damage we have done to the biosphere in just a few centures.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a rough climate, so that is in itself rather problematic. I think the biggest concern for wild horses is that they are feeding on lands that cattle grazers want to use on the cheap, and the horses aren't a real threat other than that. Moving them 1500+ miles to the north would be very costly, and most would probably not survive. Sure, the high desert areas where they tend to live gets damn cold, but you are talking a shift in temperature of another 20-30 degrees.

Now, it does make more sense to move herds to areas with increased fire danger... but in California, they are already there. It's largely inhospitable land that other species have moved away from.

Yeah, the major issue is the cattle ranchers, the horses themselves aren't very ecologically damage in the optimal conditions, but when you force them to occupy a patch of land with no ecological checks and balances (because the only thing they hate more than horses are wolves, even censoring and forcing the resignation of a scientist that concluded that shooting wolves only increased livestock predation).

[Puupi]

Wild horses in Alaska?

Freezing to extinction sounds like a solid plan.

[Machismo]

Did you even read what I posted? The problem with the horses in the deserts and Great Plains region in the US is that they're pushed off land and forced to occupy smaller areas with less mobility and exterminated predators.

Horses are not stationary, they are constantly moving in large herds. In Alaska and the regions (in both the Americas and Eurasia) I was referring to, this lack of space and predators wouldn't be an issue.

And yes, they would create more grassland, that's the entire point. The entire region was once a megafauna ecosystem, meaning it was engineered by megafauna through their ecological functions, no different from the large grazers and browsers in Africa and the Indian Subcontinent. The grazers fertilize grass, dimish the overspreading of bushes and shrubs which choke the growth of grass among many other things.

10,000 is not even a blink in the eye for evolution. It'll take 5-7 million years alone just to undo the ecological damage we have done to the biosphere in just a few centures.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, the major issue is the cattle ranchers, the horses themselves aren't very ecologically damage in the optimal conditions, but when you force them to occupy a patch of land with no ecological checks and balances (because the only thing they hate more than horses are wolves, even censoring and forcing the resignation of a scientist that concluded that shooting wolves only increased livestock predation).

The real issue was the long-term hunting of predators, as well as the expansion of cattle farmers over the past century. Honestly, there is plenty of land, that's not really an issue. The issue is that the cattle farmers don't want to share the land, and they want to use public resources on the cheap. Ideally, the BLM should reduce the number of grazing licenses, and sell more of their public land into private hands. Land acreage is not the issue, the desire to use the limited water on those lands is where the real limitations kick in. BLM has done a very poor job of managing the lands over the past few decades, and it's largely due to selfishness and bureaucracy. You have areas stretching from central Oregon and Norther California, all the way into Texas, Oklahoma, and both Dakotas. The land is there, the management is not.

[Techno-Druid]

The real issue was the long-term hunting of predators, as well as the expansion of cattle farmers over the past century. Honestly, there is plenty of land, that's not really an issue. The issue is that the cattle farmers don't want to share the land, and they want to use public resources on the cheap. Ideally, the BLM should reduce the number of grazing licenses, and sell more of their public land into private hands. Land acreage is not the issue, the desire to use the limited water on those lands is where the real limitations kick in. BLM has done a very poor job of managing the lands over the past few decades, and it's largely due to selfishness and bureaucracy. You have areas stretching from central Oregon and Norther California, all the way into Texas, Oklahoma, and both Dakotas. The land is there, the management is not.

It's part BLM, part ranchers, part public outrcry imo. Generally speaking, horses and burros are not environmentally destructive. It's mostly to due with competition with cattle and land extirpation like I mentioned before.

[Dalheim]

Pretty sure mustang horses don’t have the type of winter coats (fur) that could withstand such freezing temperatures, nor do they have the instinct to eat large amounts before winter to pack on pounds to survive. You’re talking about an extreme change in temperature for a creature that’s not suited for it. They’re not build for it and would very likely freeze to death.

For it to even work, it would have to be a breed of horse like the Yakutian, which could actually survive in those temps, but they’re pretty rare.

That's what I was thinking when I read this. I don't have the greatest geographical knowledge, but Alaska is pretty darn cold. The animals must be adapted to extreme cold to begin with, otherwise you can't just dump them there.

[Techno-Druid]

That's what I was thinking when I read this. I don't have the greatest geographical knowledge, but Alaska is pretty darn cold. The animals must be adapted to extreme cold to begin with, otherwise you can't just dump them there.

I was thinking about a slow acclimation process, maybe two years, although that probably won't work thinking about it either.

Maybe just introduce Pzrewalski's horses, considering their population could use expansion.

[Deleted]

Could wild horses be moved to Alaska? Sure.

Then they would, of course, end up as wolf dinner and dying in the snow in winter.

[Seranthor]

I was thinking about a slow acclimation process, maybe two years, although that probably won't work thinking about it either.

Maybe just introduce Pzrewalski's horses, considering their population could use expansion.

So what you are saying is you want to import food for the wolves and bears, is that what you are saying?

[Techno-Druid]

So what you are saying is you want to import food for the wolves and bears, is that what you are saying?

Most large grazers in the wild are food for something, however their ecological impact would be the most important aspect. You cannot have a functioning ecosystem without a food chain and horses naturally evolved to cope with predators, even most domesticated horses.

[Deleted]

Most large grazers in the wild are food for something, however their ecological impact would be the most important aspect. You cannot have a functioning ecosystem without a food chain and horses naturally evolved to cope with predators, even most domesticated horses.

How do you suggest the horses survive winter, when everything is covered in 3-4 feet of snow?

[Techno-Druid]

How do you suggest the horses survive winter, when everything is covered in 3-4 feet of snow?

Thinking about further, the mustangs in the Midwest and Southwest shouldn't be moved from their regions (they should probably be relocated away where they compete with cattle however, where much of the complains surrounding the horses stems.

You could introduce Yakutian horses or Pzrewalski's horses however, both of which are adapted to extreme climes.

^ These horses are actually used in the "Pleistocene Park" experiment alongside other species.

[Ghostpanther]

The local brown and polar bears would love to see that happen.

[Najnaj]

With evidence indicating that large grazers help us by indirectly keeping the Permafrost colder, wouldn't it be logical to attempt a mass relocation of mustang horses to Alaska and maybe parts of Northern Canada? It seems like a more viable solution to the 'wild horse's problem that also benefits us and the environment.

Alternatively, we could import Yakutian horses or the wild Pzrewalski's horse instead, but it seems like it would at least be worth a try.

They were never native to those areas. If we learned anything from Australia it is that introducing animals to a new environment will rarely go as you planned. You have a few successful implants (that sea slug that only eats Caluerpa comes to mind) but for every good example there are a thousand bad ones.