Trail riders can take simple steps, such as picking their horses’ hooves before and aſt er each ride, to help prevent spread of invasive species. Photo courtesy of Jennifer M. Keeler
“In a fi ve-year study, Summer concluded that horse traffi c was not the dominant process causing erosion on trails. Trail degradation was a function of landform, climatic and catastrophic events and geomorphic processes.”
processes. Limited data suggested that foot traffi c produced eff ects similar to horse traffi c in exposing the trail to the eff ects of geomorphic process or climatic events. Williams and Conway-Durver concur that factors other than user
type are more closely linked to trail degradation. Lightly used trails may grow over and require more maintenance, whereas moderate horse activity may help to maintain a multiple-use trail.
MYTH: Horses on trails disturb wildlife. FACT: Horses are prey animals and, as such, do not disturb other
wild prey animals, such as birds or deer, that might inhabit the conser- vation land. Conversely, dogs and humans are predator animals, and cause alarm among prey animals. In an extensive review of recreation eff ects on birds, Bennet and
Zuelke concluded that disturbance from recreation has temporary eff ects on behavior and movement of birds. Direct approaches caused greater disturbance than tangential approaches. For example, the rapid movement of joggers was more disturbing than slower hikers; children and photographers were especially disturbing; and passing or stopping vehicles were less disturbing than human foot traffi c. Horses and riders did not disturb birds. Sporadic human use can disturb wildlife. However, “Many animals
are less afraid of horseback riders than hikers. Riders seldom dismount to touch fl ora or fauna. Riders can be a dedicated and energetic volun- teer and advocacy group....Horses are useful for patrols, supplying trail maintenance and doing surveys. Horse traffi c can be used to maintain fi rebreaks and seldom-used trails” (Williams).
MYTH: Horses on trails adversely aff ect water supplies. FACT: According to studies by the National Animal Health Moni-
toring System, the University of Colorado, and UC Davis-Tulare, horses on trails are not detrimental to water quality. While horses do defecate on trails, they do not readily urinate on
trails (Gosslin). Horses stretch their bodies out in an awkward position to urinate, oſt en standing on the front edges of their hooves in a splayed posture. T is stance places them in a vulnerable position if at acked by a predator. Sixty million years of evolution and survival means that this is an activity not undertaken lightly by the horse. Most horses prefer the safety and security of their stall or paddock to undertake this function (UC Davis Book of Horses, 1996). Because of this unique behavior, it is easy for a rider to urge a horse out of a streambed to avoid urination in a water body. No studies implicate equines in groundwater contamination. Ac-
cording to UC Davis Manure Management Specialist Meyer, horses eliminate primarily in their pastures and paddocks. Furthermore, any manure leſt in a loose heap in deposits on trails loses its nitrogen rapidly. According to Quinn, it is “inconceivable that trail horses making dispersed deposits could possibly impact ground water. Most contamination of this sort occurs from areas associated with feedlots where thousands of commercially harvested animals are confi ned at one time, or from excessive fertilization added to soils.”
T e Equine Land Conservation Resource (ELCR) is the only national not-for- profi t organization advancing the conservation of land for horse-related activity. For more information, visit
www.elcr.org or call 859-455-8383.
WWW.TRAILBLAZERMAGAZINE.US • November 2012 | 35
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100