, 1927-08-10
THE WILD H0RSEE LAW
Is A LARGE MIDDLE
Law Provides That Petitioners
Must Pay Expense of Roundup
to be Reimbursed when Horses
are Sold

Cola W. Shepard, editor of the
Colony Coyote, has taken time to
read the wild horse roundup law.
which he comments on in a recent
issue in the following interesting
manner:
Section 3 of the wild horse law,
s%tipulates that the expenses of the
roundup shall be borne by the pc
titioners and that the county shall
not pay any part or be liable for
any part of such expenses, but no
provision is made for collecting
from such petitioners. Section IL
Including taxes on abandoned shors-
es, shall be turned into the "aband-
oned horse fund" from which the
petitioners are to be reimbursed for
the money they have paid out in
connection with the roundup. Sec
tion 8 also stipulates that payment
shall be made "by warrant issued
upon claims filed as in the case of
other claims against the county,
1t would seem hat those who did
the work, and furnished the pasture
ETC., might have to cash their war
rants in the next world if the fees
collected fell short. No provision
is made for collecting from the
petitioners, and no stipulation as to
partial payment of warrants in case
of shortage. In fact, after cover
ing several pages with this law the
makers left the financial part in
very much of a muddle. We take
it for granted that the roundup
foreman is to be paid, but can find
no hint as to how much he is to
get.
while the county is not to pay
out any money for these %roundups,
yet they will cost the county enough
for every detail is left to the board
of county commissioners, aud they
will have to be in session a lot of
extra time to pass on claims of one
kind and another. The county clerk
will get a lot of extra work. The
county assessor will be called upon
frequently, and the county treasurer
will need a whole new set of books
to keep track of all the separate
funds which may be created. Extra
work means extra help, for which
the county must pay, and it seems
that most of this extra work is
rather unnecessary.
Only One Roundup
mo provision is made for more
than one roundup of a district, yet
no provision is made for closing up
the affairs of a roundup district,
and Section 13 specifies that the
county treasurer shall report the
amount of money in the abandoned
horse fund each year and that it
shall be invested, from which we
infer that after a district is once
formed it always remains, and that
subsequent roundups may be had.
But Section IS reads as though
there was TO be but one roundup
in any district.
This Section 1S might work. a
hardship if rigidly enforced, for
many people will doubtless have
horses running on the range when
a district is created. and will want
to get some of them in, perhaps a
team of work horses or a saddle
hoi DC, Dut ottllono 10 anu 10 SttlI
to make 1t a misdemeanor punish
able by a fine of not less than $50
to roundup any horse in a district
which has once been created until
after the general roundup. Accord
ing to this any man who has any
horses running on the range when
a roundup district is declared is
out of luck, for he dare not go out
and get one, If he needs 1t ever SO
badly, and 1t will be entirely up
to the judgment of the roundup
foreman to decide whether or not
any of his horses can be considered
as legally or the range. Further
more, If those engaged in the round
up wish to be mean they can shoot
his horse and say it was hard to