Image: Canva
The US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) approved four 10-year plans to round up and remove wild horses from public lands, but a federal court ruled parts of the programme unlawful. On February 20, 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed an appeal by Friends of Animals, leaving the agency to revise the plans. The BLM approved 10-year gathering plans for the Eagle Complex, Onaqui Mountain, Muddy Creek and Pine Nut Mountains areas, according to the court opinion published by Justia. Friends of Animals challenged the decisions in August 2018, arguing that the plans permitted an indefinite number of removals without specific findings about excess horses or adequate use of current information and independent consultation. Under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, the BLM must maintain current population inventories and consult relevant wildlife agencies and qualified experts when deciding whether removals are necessary.
Because the district court’s order sending the case back to the BLM was not a final decision, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed the appeal on February 20, 2026,. The case therefore returned to the agency for further action rather than ending with a final appellate ruling on the underlying dispute.
In its Wild Horse Victories account, Friends of Animals said the court required the agency to set reasonable limits on follow-up round-ups, including the information needed before further operations could take place. Instead, it said the agency still had work to do, including clarifying when further removals could proceed and what information would be required. The dispute centred on whether officials could authorise repeated removals without reassessing horse populations, using current information and consulting independent experts. Friends of Animals’ account of the case describes the ruling as a limit on the agency’s authority to continue round-ups under long-term plans. The plans allowed officials to conduct multiple round-ups to bring horse populations within approved management levels. The agency argued that achieving those targets in a single operation had become impractical as populations grew, making repeated removals necessary. The US District Court for the District of Columbia found that the plans exceeded the BLM’s authority where they permitted further round-ups after the stated population targets had been reached. It also ruled that future removals could not rely on materially outdated information or consultations, and that the agency had a duty to act promptly. The appeals court did not overturn the lower court’s findings that parts of the plans were unlawful. Friends of Animals noted that the BLM had not disputed the lower court’s findings concerning removals after approved population targets were reached or operations based on materially outdated information.
